ADDRESS 


OF  THE 


^^  i^  E  s  I  ID  E  isr  T 


OF  THE 


0a,  €mM  lailruair  ^a,, 


TO   THE 


STOCKHOLDERS, 


ON    THE 


« 


SUBJECT  OF  WITHDRAWAL  OF  THE  MATLg 


BY   tITe 


POSTMASTER  GENERAL. 


RICHMOND: 

MACFARLANE  &  FRRGrssON,  PRINTERS 

1864.- 


ADDRESS 


or  THE 


iPi^ESiiDEinsra? 


OP  THE 


.  Central  %mhii  C0., 


TO   THE 


STOCKHOLDERS, 


ON  THE 


SUBJECT  OF  WITHDRAWAL  OF  THE  MAILS 


• 

i\  BY  THE 


POSTMASTER  GENERAL. 


RICHMOND: 

MACFARLANE  &  FEROUSSON,  PRINTERg, 

1864, 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 
in  2011  witin  funding  from 
Dul<e  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/addressofpresideOOfont 


ADDRESS 


To  the  Stockholders  of  the 

Virginia  Central  Railroad. 
Gentlemen, — You  are  aware  that  by  the  order  of  the  Postmaster 
General,  the  mail  was  withdrawn  from  jour  road  on  the  11th  day  of 
August,  and  withheld  from  it  until  the  6th  instant.  At  your  next  an- 
nual meeting  it  would  have  been  my  duty  to  lay  before  you  in  the  an- 
nual report  of  the  Board,  all  the  facts  connected  with  the  interruption 
of  the  mail,  and  to  that  period  I  would  have  deferred  my  report  of  the 
case,  if  the  Postmaster  General  had  not  thought  proper  to  publish  a 
pamphlet  copy  of  our  correspondence,  from  which,  by  some  accident, 
my  reply  to  his  letter  of  the  1st  of  August  was  omitted.  That  publi- 
cation makes  it  my  duty  to  lay  before  you  the  whole  correspondence  in 
anticipation  of  the  annual  meeting  in  November  next,  in  order  that 
you  may  be  possessed  of  all  the  facts  of  the  case. 

A  controversy  has  just  been  closed  with  the  Postmaster  General  in 
reference  to  the  character  of  the  contract  which  should  be  signed  for 
the  transportation  of  the  mails,  the  importance  of  which,  not  only  to 
this  company  and  the  railroad  interest  of  the  Confederacy,  but  to  the 
people  of  the  Confederate  States,  as  it  involved  an  important  principle 
of  free  government,  has  not  been  properly  appreciated. 

You  know  of  the  general  fact  that  after  an  experience  of  a  contract 
of  two  years,  ending  July  1st,  1863,  during  which  they  learned  the  con- 
struction the  Postmaster  gave  to  the  extent  of  his  power  under  that  con- 
tract, the  Board  were  unwilling  to  renew  it  without  modification,  though 
continuing  to  carry  the  mails,  but  you  do  not  know  the  reasons  which 
influenced  them.  It  is  proper  that  you  should  know  why,  after  all  the 
excitement  growing  out  of  the  Postmaster  General  removing  the  mails 
from  the  road,  the  Board  of  Directors  unanimously  passed  a  resolution 
approving  the  course  of  the  President  in  refusing  to  sign  the  contract 
without  proper  modifications,  that  several  other  Virginia  railroad  Presi- 
dents had  refused  to  sign  it,  and  that,  of  those  who  had  signed,  some, 
if  not  all,  had  obtained  verbal  satisfaction  on  points  of  objection. 

Reasons  for  not  SiONiNa  Contract  wiTnouT  Modification. 

In  May  1861,  a  contract  was  proposed  extending  to  June  30,  1863. 
The  provisions  were  found  to  be  a  literal  transcript  from  that  of  the  U. 


S.  Grovernment,  and  as  no  difficulty  had  ever  arisen  with  that  Govern- 
ment, none  was  to  be  expected  with  this.  It  was  reasonable  to  expect 
that  as  the  provisions  were  cojyied,  the  practice  under  them  would  he 
the  smne,  but  it  was  not  long  before  we  found  ourselves  much  disap- 
pointed. We  found  that  powers  which  might  have  been  claimed,  but 
had  lain  dormant  under  the  old  Government,  were  exercised  \xp  to  the 
full  letter  of  the  contract,  and  the  practice  was  changed  in  a  very  im- 
portant particular  relating  to  the  enforcement  of  fines,  in  violation  of 
principles  which  we  supposed  were  established  in  all  proceedings,  both 
civil  and  criminal,  where  pains  and  penalties  of  any  kind  were  involved, 
viz :  that  any  supposed  delinquent  should  be  notified  of  the  charge 
ac'ainst  him,  and  heard  before  condemnation. 

1st.  The  rule  invariably  observed  with  the  U.  S.  Postoffice  Depart- 
ment, when  a  contractor  was  reported  as  a  del'.nquent,  was  to  notify  him 
promptly  the  precise  nature  of  the  charge,  time  and  place  being  men- 
tioned, and  calling  for  an  explanation.  Our  Postmaster  General  abol- 
ished that  eminently  just  and  proper  rule,  and  refused  to  give  notice. 
In  the  commencement  of  the  first  contract  our  mail  pay  was  deducted 
and  we  do  not  know  to  this  day  for  what  it  was  done,  as  I  am  informed 
by  our  Treasurer.  lie  slightly  modified  his  first  practice  on  that  sub- 
ject. He  explained  at  the  end  of  a  quarter,  or  any  later  period,  when 
a  settlement  is  being  made,  the  character  of  the  fine,  but  still  omits  the 
material  requirement  of  justice,  notice  at  the  time  the  charge  is  made, 
that  the  party  may  have  a  fair  opportunity  to  release  himself  .from  the 
payment  of  the  fine. 

The  violation  of  the  principles  of  justice  in  his  modified  rule  requires 
but  little  comment.  It  is  not  unlike  the  case  of  a  man  sentenced  to 
death,  who  never  heard  of  any  charge  against  him  until  th«  day  of  his 
execution. 

2d.  Although  the  whole  compensation  this  company  would  receive 
per  annum  for  carrying  the  mails  between  Richmond  and  Jackson's 
Kiver,  would  be  a  mere  pittance  in  existing  circumstances,  and  virtu- 
ally the  company  is  rendering  the  service  from  patriotic  considerations, 
he  had  deducted  from  their  pay  for  every  day  the  mail  is  not  actually 
carried,  no  matter  by  what  cause  prevented,  whether  the  presence  of 
the  public  enemy  or  the  necessary  appropriation  of  our  trains  by  mili- 
tary authority  to  some  urgent  purpose  of  public  defence.  I  had  sup- 
posed that  it  was  universally  conceded  that  penalties  would  not  attach 
to  the  non-fulfillment  of  any  contract,  if  the  failure  was  caused  by  the 
act  of  God,  or  the  public  enemy.  It  seems  to  me  that  exemption  from 
fines  where  there  was  a  necessary  interference  of  our  own  military  au- 
thorities ought  to  be  regarded  a  stronger  case  than  that  of  the  public 


enemy;  the  latter  we  might  resist  if  we  could,  but  it  would  not  only  be 
unavailing  to  attciiijit  to  resist  our  own  military  authorities,  but  it  would 
be  unlawful  and  unpatriotic  to  do  so. 

The  pecuniary  value  of  these  fines  and  deductions  was  not  the  most 
important  consideration  in  this  controversy — it  was  a  principle  which 
called  for  resistance  of  authority  improperly  exercised,  although  it  was 
done  -with  good  motives. 

3d.  Another  source  of  dissatisfaction  was  his  refusal  to  allow  the 
apartment  of  the  mail  car  to  be  subjected  to  such  supervision  and  police 
as  would  protect  the  company  from  unauthorised  transportation  of  arti- 
cles of  freight  in  that  apartment.  No  one  disputes  the  propriety  of 
the  mail  car  bding  kept  free  from  the  admission  of  promiscuous  travel; 
but  when  a  large  apartment  of  a  car  is  assigned  to  the  use  of  the  Post- 
Biaster  General,  it  should  not  be  used  by  his  agent  for  any  other  pur- 
pose except  the  transportation  of  the  mails.  It  was  not  only  reasona- 
ble to  apprcliritd  that  in  these  days  of  demoralization  and  speculation, 
there  might  "be  some  articles  unlawfully  carried  in  the  mail  apartment, 
if  there  was  no  right  reserved  to  enter  and  inspect  it,  hut  tJie  fact  has 
occurred  on  tJiin  road.  Great  abuses  have  been  practised  not  only  on 
this  road,  but,  I  learn,  on  many  others,  and  the  right  was  asked  for 
each  one  of  the  Directors  to  enter  and  inspect  this  apartment  to  see 
that  nothing  improper  was  carried  in  it;  this  was  refused.  This  road 
is  peculiarly  subjected  to  the  danger  of  having  packages  smuggled  into 
this  car.  For  f-everal  months  of  the  year,  the  car  is  necessarily  out  on 
the  track  at  Staunton  before  light,  and  arrives  at  Richmond  after  dark, 
thus  giving  a  tempting  opportunity  for  smuggling.  I  believe  most  of 
the  route  agents  are  honest,  trustworthy  gentlemen,  but  it  is  not  proper, 
nor  is  it  the  custom,  to. expose  the  interests  of  a  railroad  company  with 
no  other  security  but  the  supposed  integrity  of  an  officer.  We  take 
bonds  and  security  to  ensure  fidelity  from  men  of  the  highest  charac- 
ter. The  Postmaster  General  puts  whomsoever  he  chooses  in  the 
place  of  route  agent.  He  is  liable  to  be  imposed  upon,  and  to 
get  a  scoundrel  on  our  cars.  Is  it  not  the  dnii/  of  the  President  to 
throw  all  Ihe  guards  he  can  around  the  company's  interests  ?  I  am  in- 
formed by  the  Superintendent  that  barrels  of  flour  have  been  carried  in 
the  mail  apartii.ent.  It  has  been  but  a  short  time  since  one  of  his 
agents,  after  defrauding  a  number  of  persons  about  Staunton,  went  off 
with  the  enemy. 

Why  should  objection  be  made  to  the  supervision  of  this  apartmen* 
by  the  Directors  ?  I  asked  this  right  to  protect  the  intc7-ests  of  the 
compatiiy.  I  asked  it  before  any  controversy  had  arisen,  as  will  be  seen 
by  the  following  copy  of  a  letter  on  the  subject,  and  for  that  purpose: 


e 

"  Va.  Central  Railroad,  Presidknt'b  Office.  1 
'•  Beavcrdam.  July  3d,  ISOl.       f 
"Hon.  J   H.  Rbagan,  P.  3/.  G«ncraZ; 

"Dear  Sir, — As  this  conipany  is  continuing  to  cnrry  the  mail  withom  hav- 
ing made  any  contract,  to  prevent  miscoiisiruclionj  I  vvnie  to  say  tliat  I  can- 
not fonseiit  to  a  lenewa'  of  some  of  its  cdnditions. 

'•  Bc:'ides  objections  t(i  the  unprecedented  rigour  in  demandiftfe  a  liieral 
compliiince  with  the  terins  of  the  eoniract.  I  cannot  consent  that  Hny  onp 
shall  l>e  authorized  to  o<-cnpy  a  larjie  apairment  in  our  cars  and  the  chihl  ciffi- 
cers  "f  the  company  not  be  HJIowed  to  enter  it  when  it  is  possiblt  that  ii  may  be 
uted  to  the  great  prejudice  of  its  inlerexis.  \ 

'•Very  respectfully, 
'■  (Si-ned.)  E.  FONTAINE,  Pn-.^.V..,/.  «       \ 

It  \v;is  urged  that  the  law  requires  the  exclusion  of  all  but  su  in  of- 
ficers;  the. Postruaster  General  was  estopped  from  taking  this  ii'duud 
by  hav'in<4  in  his  letter  of  llth  of  April  conceded  that  the  Prc^i'K'nta 
and  Superintendents  of  railroads  "might  tkavel  in  the  maii,  cab. 
when  they  wished,"  and,  furthermore,  that  the  interests  of  the  company 
do  n-f^uire  some  protection  in  the  premises. 

In  his  letter  of  April  llth,  18t^4,  he  says  his  first  rule  of  total  ex- 
clusion had  been  so  far  modified  "  as  to  allow  the  Presidents  and  Super- 
intendents of  railroads  to  travel  in  the  mail  cars  when  they  wished  to 
do  so,  and  thai  conductors  should  at  all  times  be  allowed  to  pass  tlirough 
and  examine  the  mail  cars  to  prevent  any  thing  improper  from  being 
carried  in  them  "  I  contended  that  as  there  was  no  legal  impediment 
to  the  admission  of  the  Directors;  as  they  were  the  chosen  guardians 
of  the  interests  of  the  Stockholders,  they  ought  at  least  to  participate 
in  njakiiig  this  inspection  of  the  mail  car.  The  President  and  Super- 
intendent rarely  travel  over  the  whole  road,  and  even  if  the  Directors 
were  added,  there  would  be  still  but  an  imperfect  supervision.  I  am 
gratified  to  be  able  to  say  that  our  conductors  aTe  gentlemen  of  excel- 
lent chaiacter  as  I  believe;  but  is  it  proper  that  they  sli^uld  supercede 
the  Directors  in  their  appropriate  duties?  The  conductors  have  a  very 
constant  task  in  attending  to  other  duties,  especially  at  all  points  wliere 
the  trains  stop  :  and  it  seems  that  they  have  not  been  able  to  prevent 
eren  barrels  of  flour  from  being  taken  on  the  mail  car.  The  facility  of 
concealing  freight  under  mail  bags  may  readily  be  understood  as  likely 
to  bafile  any  ordinary  vigilance,  if  the  mail  agent  should  be  dishonest. 
'  I  therefore  wanted  the  additional  guard  of  an  occasional  and  unexpect- 
ed visit  from  a  Director  who,  it  was  to  be  presumed,  would  have  less 
hesitation  in  exposing  any  impropriety  than  the  conductors.  I  have 
been  willing  at  all  times,  if  required,  to  limit  the  admission  of  Direc- 
tors to  one  at  a  time  in  the  mail  apartment. 

The  foregoing  objections  to  signing  the  contract  were  disclosed  in  the 
progress  of  the  first  term  ot  two  years,  by  actual  experience.     ^J'he  sub- 


sequent  discussion  of  these  three  points  brought  to  our  notice  other 
objections  which  might  be  practically  felt  during  the  present  term,  now 
nearly  three  years  to  run. 

It  is  proper  to  say  that  in  the  progress  of  this  controversy  I  had  the 
Valuable  aid  and  co-operation  of  Peter  V.  Daniel,  Esq.,  President  of  the 
Eichmond,  Fredericksburg  and  Potomac  Company,  in  effecting  a  satis- 
factory modification  of  the  contract,  to  which  he  entertained  all  my  ob- 
jections. « 

4th.  The  contract  required  the  company  to  fit  up  at  their  own  ex- 
pense a  mail  apartment  ''for  the  exclusive  use  of  the  Department  and 
its  ag3nt,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Postmaster  General  or  his  author- 
ized agent,"  with  no  limitation  as  to  the  extent  of  space  or  cost  of 
equipment,  except  his  discretion.     This  has  been  modified. 

5th.  The  sixth  article  declared  "that  the  company  shall  be  subject 
to  fine,"  for  several  enumerated  failures;  and  here  again  there  was  no 
expressed  limitation  of  the  amount  of  fines  which  might  be  imposed. 

6th.  The  company  was  liable  to  the  forfeiture  of  its  contract,  and  the 
consequent  withdrawal  of  the  mails  with  its  attendant  responsibilities, 
if  it  disoheyed  any  of  ^Hlie  instructions  of  the  Department  without  any 
qualification  or  condition  annexed,"  as  to  the  character  of  those  in- 
structions. 

Concessions  Obtained. 

When  wc  announce  the  several  modifications  of  the  contract  which 
have  been  conceded,  we  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  claiming  any 
triumph  over  the  Postmaster  General  in  effecting  these  concessions,  and 
desire  to  show  you  that  we  have  not  been  actuated  by  a  spirit  of  oppo- 
sition to  him,  but  that  we  have  been  aiming  to  accomplish  a  practical 
benefit  for  you  and  the  community;  and  we  cheerfully  admit  that  he 
has  made  the  several  changes  in  th^  contract  under  a  commendable 
sense  of  duty,  resulting  from  the  consideration  of  the  subject  induced 
by  the  discussions  which  have  taken  place. 

1st.  Eailroad  companies  are  to  have  written  notice  when  reports  are 
made  subjecting  them  to  fines. 

2d.  Besides  the  ofiicers  formerly  admitted  into  the  mail  cars,  any  other 
officer  may  be,  who  is  named,  for  the  purpose  of  police  and  inspection. 

3d.  Deductions  of  pay  for  not  performing  a  trip  are  made  subject 
to  specified  conditions. 

4th.  Fines  for  the  several  failures  enumerated  in  Article  VI.  of  the 
old  contract,  are  not  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  Postmaster,  but  are 
made  a  subject  of  agreement  in  the  modified  contract. 

5th.  The  instructions  which  now  subject  the  railroad  company  to 


forfeiture  of  contract  if  not  obeyed  must  be  sbown  to  be  made  in  con- 
formity with  the  Postoffice  law  and  the  contract. 

None  could  have  regretted  the  annoyance  and  inconvenience  result- 
ing from  the  interruption  of  the  mail  more  than  the  President  and  Di- 
rectors, and  they  did  all  in  their  power  to  mitigate  them  by  a  pub-' 
lie  offer,  a  copy  of  which  is  herewith  printed,  to  carry,  witliout  cliargey\ 
all  newspapers  and  pre-paid  letters,  and  did  carry  them.* 

I  am  happy,  however,  in  reporting  the  favorable  termination  of  the 
unpleasant  controversy,  restoring  the  public  accommodation,  and  pre- 
serving the  rights  of  the  company  by  a  return  ©f  the  mail  on  the  terms 
above  mentioned. 

That  the  Hon.  Postmaster  General  believed  he  was  doing  right  in 
what  he  did,  I  will  not  deny,  because  I  am  not  disposed  to  question  his 
probity  o-r  his  patriotism,  but  I  feel  that  I  may  say  with  all  proper  re- 
epect  to  him,  that  the  facts  and  the  conclusion  show  that  he  was  in  er- 
ror, and  that  the  President  and  Directors  could  not  have  acted  other- 
wise in  their  view  of  the  subject^  if  they  faithfully  represented  you  and 
respected  themselves. 

I  have  only  now  to  ask  that  you  will  read  the  corrected  copy  of  the 
correspondence  that  you  may  see  in  what  manner  I  attempted  to  dis- 
charge my  duty  in  the  premises;  which,  I  will  add,  has  been  far  from 
being  a  pleasant  one.  KespectfuUy, 

E.  FONTAINE,  Pres't. 
On  hehalf  of  the  Board  of  Directors. 

OiTicE  Va.  Centrai/  Railuoad  Co., 
RicUmond,  Sept.  7,  1864. 


*  Mails  on  the  Va.  Central  Railroad. — An  advertisement  of  the  Postmas- 
ter General,  in  the  Sentinel  and  Dixpatrh,  is  calculated  to  produce  the  impres- 
sion that  this  company  has  refused  to»carry  the  mails.  So  far  Jroni  this  being 
the  fact,  he  has  rtfnsed  to  allow  the  company  to  carry  them.  The  company  has 
carried  the  maiis  for  more,  than  twelve  months  without  complaint  from  him 
or  any  one  else,  so  far  as  I  know.  He  has  refused  to  pay  anything  for  this 
service.  Nevertheless,  he  has  been  inlormed  that  the  company  would  still 
continue  to  carry  them,  being  willing  to  take  the  risk  of  not  having  juitice 
done  them  at  some  future  time. 

To  alleviate  so  far  as  practicable  the  serious  public  inconvenience  from  this 
unreasonable  and  extraordinary  course  of  the  Postmaster,  notice  is  hereby 
given,  that  the  company  will  receive  letters  and  papers  at  their  office  in  this 
city,  and  have  them  deliveretl,  wiihout  charge,  at  any  postoffice  on  the  line  of 
their  road.  Letters  wiil  be  received  in  tlie  country  by  the  depot  agents  at  the 
different  stations  on  the  road.  All  those  directed  to  Riclimond  or  points  beyond 
will  be  put  in  the  Richmond  office.  A  box  for  receiving  letters  will  be  kept 
in  the  Superintendent's  office,  which  is  open  generally  from  9  A.  M.  to  9  P. 
M.     Newspapers  may  be  sent  without  postage,  but  letters  must  be  pre  paid. 

E.  FONTAINE,  President. 

OJJice  Va.  Central  Jtailroad  Company,  Richmond,  Aug.  13,  18G4. 


COREESPOI^DENCE. 


Virginia  Central  Railroad, 
PresidenVs  Office,  Beaverdam,  Va.,  July  3,  1863. 

Dear  Sir, — As  this  company  is  continuing  to  carry  the  mail  -without 
having  made  any  contract,  to  prevent  misconstruction,  I  write  to  say  that 
I  cannot  consent  to  a  renewal  of  some  of  its  conditions. 

Besides  objections  to  the  unprecedented  rigor  in  demanding  a  literal  com- 
pliance with  the  terms  of  the  contract,  I  cannot  consent  that  any  one  shall 
be  authorized  to  occupy  a  large  apartment  in  one  of  our  cars,  and  the  chief 
officers  of  the  company  not  be  allowed  to  enter  it,  when  it  is  possible  that 
it  may  be  used  to  the  great  prejudice  of  its  interests. 
Very  respectfully, 


Bon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


E.  FONTAINE,  President. 


PosTorncE  Departmext, 

Richmond,  July  8,  18G3. 

Sir,  Your  letter  of  the  3d  instant  is  received,  in  which  you  say  you  can- 
not consent  to  a  renewal  of  some  of  the  conditions  on  which  your  company 
catrl??  -.hc  mails.  You  say,  "  besides  objections  to  the  unprecedented 
ri;r  ~  ir.  d.^n^anding  a  literal  compliance  with  the  terms  of  the  contract,  I 
cannot  consent  that  any  one  shall  be  authorized  to  occupy  a  large  apart- 
ment in  one  of  our  cars,  and  the  chief  officers  of  the  company  not  be  allow- 
ed to  enter  it,  when  it  is  possible  that  it  may  be  used  to  the  great  prejudice 
of  its  interests." 

I  hope,  by  a  proper  understanding,  your  objections  to  a  renewal  of  your 
contract  with  the  department  may  be  obviated. 

On  the  first  point,  I  have  to  say  that  the  performance  of  the  mail  service 
and  uf  my  duties  connected  with  it,  are  regulated  by  law.  Where  the  ser- 
vice is  performed  according  to  contract,  the  contractor  is  necessarily  paid 
the  full  contract  price  for  ^le  service.  Wliere  the  contractors  fail  to  per- 
ferm  the  service,  I  am  required  by  law  to  make  proper  deductions  from 
their  pay.  Such  deductions  are  made  upon  fixed  and  reasonable  rules  ; 
and  if  tliese  should  in  any  case  be  so  misapplied  as  to  work  injustice  -to  a 
contractor,  a  representation  of  the  facts  to  the  department  would  cause  a 
prompt  correction  of  the  error.  It  is  on  these  principles  that  I  have  en- 
deavored to  act;  and  while  it  has  been  my  object  to  exact  in  behalf  of  the 
public  a  faithful  performance  of  duty  by  contractors  for  carrying  the 
mails,  I  have  been  equally  careful  to  avoid  unreasonable  or  unlawful  ex- 
actions. And  I  have  uniformly  consulted  the  railroad  companies  with 
which  we  have  contracts,  as  to  schedules,  and  had  special  reference  to 
their  wishes  in  fixing  them,  so  as  to  avoid  injury  to  their  interests  as  far  as 
possible. 

On  the  other  point  made  in  your  lefier,  1  would  say  that  it  was  found 
that  in  some  instances  railroad  conductors  were  making  use  of  the  mail 
cars  as  their  offices,  and  as  a  consequence,   taking  their  friends  and  ae- 


10 

qaaintances  into  the  mail  cars  at  pleasure.  This  produced  serious  cdm- 
piaints  from  route  agents,  and  tn  a  greater  or  less  extent  endangered  the 
security  of  the  mails.  It  was  this  •which  gave  rise  to  the  order  to  exclude 
all  persons  from  the  mail  cars  excppt  the  sworn  agents  of  the  department, 
er^thojip  having  its  permission.  Cases  have  been  brought  to  my  knowledge 
in  which  the  pre^iidents  and  superintendents  of  railroads  have  complained 
of  the  rule,  on  the  ground  of  its  exclusion  of  them  from  the  mail  cars,  as 
well  as  on  the  ground  you  mention,  of  the  necessity  for  the  companies  to 
have  the  power  of  police  over  the  mail  cars,  as  well  as  others,  to  guard 
•gainst  abuse  by  the  transportation  of  other  than  mail  -matter.  In  these 
cases  I  have  directed  that  the  presidents  and  superintendents  of  railroads 
should  be  allowed,  when  they  wished,  to  travv^l  in  the  mail  cars,  and  that 
conductors  should  in  all  cases  be  allowed  to  pass  through  and  examine  the 
mail  cars,  to  prevent  any  thing  improper  from  being  carried  in  them.  I 
did  not  know  but  that  this  had  bten  made  known  to  you,  and  will  have  in- 
structions to  this  eflfect  sent  to  the  route  agpiits  on  your  road. 

I  trust  that  these  suggestions  will  obviate  your  objections  to  renewing 
your  contract. 

Very  respectfully, 

JOIIN  II.  REAGAN,  P.  M.  General. 
E.  Fontaine,  Esq.,  Fres.  Va.  Central  R.  R.  Co. 


PosTOFFicE  Department, 
Inspection  Office,  Richmond,  July  8,  1863. 

Sir, — The  postmaster  general  has  so  far  modified  my  order  of  September 
3,  1862,  as  to  allow  the  president  and  superintendent  of  the  Virginia  Cen- 
tral railroad  to  travel  in  the  mail  cars,  should  they  desire  to  do  so.  And, 
as  that  order  was  never  intended  to  affect  the  right  of  the  conductors  to 
enter  ana  inspect  the  mail  cars,  so  as  to  prevent  the  transportation  of  im- 
proper articles  in  them,  you  will  of  course  offer  no  opposition  to  their  en- 
trance for  this  purpose.  You  will  not,  however,  submit  to  any  claim  by 
conductors  to  use  your  apartment  for  the  transaction  of  their  own  business, 
or  that  of  the  company. 

Respectfully, 

B.  FULLER,  Chief  Clerk  P.  0.  D. 
G.   G.   Gooch,  Esq.,  Route  Agent,  Richmond,  Va. 

Copies  of  the  above  sent  on  same  date  to  T.  J.  Edwards,  E.  J.  Swift  and 
W.  H.  Haas,  route  agents. 


Virginij^  Central  Railroad, 
President's  Office,  Richmond,  Va.,  April  9,  1864. 

Dear  SiR.^On  the  3d  of  July  last  I  apprised  you  that  the  contract  with 
the  department  contained  certain  conditions  to  which  I  was  not  willing  to 
be  bound  by  signing,  but  would  continue  to  carry  the  mails,  on  the  same 
terms  of  course;,  until  changed  by  agreement  as  to  compensation. 

The  treasurer  of  this  company  informs  me  that  you  declined  paying  for 
service  rendered,  as  he  understood,  on  the  ground  that  the  contract  was  not 
signed,  thereby  subjecting  the  company  to  the  objectionable  features. 

There  are  three  oty'ections  to  the  contract:  1st,  the  right  claimed  to  fine 
for  some  delinquenc}',  without  stating  what  it  is  and  where  it  occurred  ; 
2d,  the  exclusion  of  the  officers  of  the  company  from  the  mail  car  ;  and 
3d,  the  exaction  of  fines  for  not  carrying  the  mails,,  though  prevented  by 
military  authority  from  doing  it. 

Your  letter  was  received,  saying  that  one  of  these  obligations  would  net 


11 

be  enforced  ;  and  whilst  I  do  not  impua;n  the  sincerity  of  your  promise,  yet 
ii  does  not  comport  with  my  views  of  propriety  in  a  business  transaction, 
to  become  bound,  in  writing,  to  a  condition  objected  to,  relying  on  the 
promise  of  forliearance  in  requiring  compliance. 

Be  good  enough  to  inform  me  whetlier  you  insist  on  having  the  contract 
signed  without  modification,  as  a  p  erequisite  to  payment  for  service 
rendered.  If  your  sense  of  duty  under  the  law  should  c-mpel  you  to 
take  that  course,  I  suppose  I  can  only  obtain  compensation  by  an  act  ot 
congress. 

Very  respectfully, 


Hon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


E.  FONTAINE,  PresidetU. 


PosTomcE  Department, 

liichmond,  April  11,  1864. 

Sir. — Your  letter  of  the  9th  instant  is  received,  in  which  yuu  say, 
"  There  are  three  objections  to  the  contract :  1st,  the  right  claimed  to  fine 
for  Some  deli-nquenoy,  without  stating  what  it  is  and  when  it  occurred; 
second,  the  exclusion  of  the  officers  of  the  company  from  the  mail  car  ;  and 
third,  the  exaction  of  fines  for  not  carrying  the  mails,  though  prevented  by 
military  authority  from  doing  it." 

In  answer  to  your  first  objection,  I  have  to  say  that  whenever  fines  and 
deductions  are  nmde  from  the  pay  of  a  contractor  for  failures  to  perform 
service,  they  are  notified,  when  the  settlement  of  the  service  for  the 
quarter  is  made,  of  the  amount  of  such  fines  or  deductions,  the  dates  of  all 
failures,  and  the  places  at  which  such  failures  were  made;  and  this  has 
been  the  established  and  uniform  rule  of  the  department  since  the  3d  cf 
March,  18G3. 

Ill  answer  to  your  second  objection,  I  have  to  say  that  in  my  letter  to 
you  of  July  8th,  1863,  you  were  informed  that  the  rule  excluding  all  per- 
sons from  the  mail  cars,  had  been  so  far  modified,  and  corresponding  direc- 
tions given  to  our  agents  on  all  railroads,  as  to  allow  the  presidents  and 
eupcrintendents  of  railroads  to, travel  in  the  mail  cars  when  they  wished  to 
do  so,  and  that  conductors  should  at  all  times  be  allowed  to  pass  through 
and  examine  the  mail  cars,  to  prevent  any  thing  improper  from  being  con- 
veyed in  them. 

There  exists,  therefore,  no  ground  in  fact  for  these  tw  o  objections,  unless 
you  desire  the  substance  of  these  instructions  inserted  in  the  contract  with 
your  company,  to  which  there  is  no  oljection  by  this  department 

In  answer  to  your  third  objection,  1  have  to  say  that  this  department 
undertakes  to  pay  a  sum  agreed  upon,  for  an  amount  of  service  agreed  on, 
to  be  performed  in  a  manner  and  by  a  schedule  agreed  on.  You  make  no 
complaint  of  the  failure  or  unwillingness  of  the  department  to  pay  for  all 
the  service  you  perform  for  it.  But  you  do  object  to  entering  into  a  con- 
tract with  it,  because  it  will  not  agree  to  pay  you  for  what  you  do  not 
do.  This  I  could  not  do  under  the  law  if  I  would.  If  you  are  damaged 
by  the  orders  of  the  war  department  interfering  with  your  schedules,  that 
department,  and  not  this,  is  responsible  for  such  damage.  The  expenses 
of  this  department  are,  by  the  requirements  of  the  constitution,  to  be 
paid  out  of  its  own  revenues.  Congress  can  give  it  no  assistance  from  the 
general  treasurj'.  Nor  can  the  other  departments  contribute  any  means 
to  aid  in  defraying  its  expenses.  In  this  respect  it  stands  alone.  And 
•while  it  is  confidently  believed  it  will  be  able  to  pay  all  its  own  just  lia- 
bilities, it  might  not  be  able  to  pay  such  damages  as  might  result  from  tha 


12 

orders  of  other  departments,  and  cannot  in  reason  be  expected  to  do  so  in 
any  case. 

We  cannot  expect  to  carry  on  tlie  postal  service  successfully,  and  have 
no  right  to  attempt  it  in  any  other  way  than  that  prescribed  by  lavr.  The 
law  requires  the  making  of  contracts  for  conveying  the  mails,  and  forbids 
the  payment  for  such  service  without  contracts. 

Very  respectfully,  ♦ 

Your  obedient  servant, 

JOHN  U.  IIEAGAN,  P.  M.  General. 
E.  Fontaine,  Esq.,  Pres.  Va.  Central  H.  R.  Co. 


Richmond,  April  15,  1864; 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  11th  instant  meets  pai-tially  one  of  my 
objections  to  signing  the  contract,  viz:  that  right  which  is  claimed  to  ex- 
clude the  officers  of  the  company  from  the  mail  car.  You  are  willing  to 
provide  for  admitting  the  president  and  superintendent.  Is  there  not  the 
same  reason  for  embracing  the  directors?  I  am  aware  of  the  impropriety 
of  tlie  mail  car  being  occupied  by  passengers  indiscriminately.  Do  you 
think  that  a  discretion  on  this  sul>ject  is  more  safely  trusted  with  one  of 
your  route  a2;ents  than  with  the  president  of  one  of  our  railroads? 

The  practice  of  your  department  on  the  subject  of  fines  conveys  an  in- 
sinuation against  the  honesty  of  a  railroad  president.  Do  you  really 
think  tiiat  a  prominent  officer  of  a  railroad  company  would  deliberately 
make  a  false  statement  to  get  rid  of  a  fine  of  a  few  dollars  ?  I  never  ex- 
pected that  the  administration  of  one  of  our  departments  of  government 
would  compare  unfavorably  with  tlie  rejected,  and  now  deservedly  detested 
one  of  the  old  Union.  Why  reverse  the  rule  of  enlightened,  civilized  and 
christian  law,  and  presume  every  man  dishonest?  If  this  is  not  to  be  the 
case,  I  can  see  no  good  reason  for  departing  from  the  practice  of  the  old 
government,  and  inform  the  contractor  that  you  propose  to  fine  him  for 
some  supposed  delinquency,  unless  he  can  give  a  sufficient  excuse.  Then 
he  might  explain  it ;  but  at  the  end  of  a  quarter  or  later",  he  probably 
would  have  lost  a  knowledge  of  the  facts  of  the  case.  Your  rule  is  calcu- 
lated to  work  injustice,  and  acquiescence  in  it  by  the  contractor  would 
seem  to  be  a  concession  that  the  department  may  not  expect  the  truth  from 
any  one. 

Your  subordinate  agent  of  the  postoffice  department  will  admit  whom  he 
chooses  in  the  mail  car.  I  say  unll,  because  you  can't  preven-t  it,  and  yet 
you  reflect  on  the  directors  of  a  railroad  company,  by  refusing  them  ad- 
mission, r^nd  cannot  trust  the  discretion  of  the  president  or  superintendent 
to  say  who  may,  under  extraordinary  circumstances,  be  admitted. 

I  think  there  is  good  ground  for  these  two  objections,  after  your  partial 
modification. 

In  relation  to  the  3d,  your  argument  is,  that  as  we  agree  to  perform  a 
specified  service,  if  we  fail  in  any  part  of  it,  no  matter  for  what  cause, 
whether  by  our  fault  or  not,  we  must  lie  fined.  We  fit  up  mail  cars  at 
considerable  expense.  We  appropriate  them  to  the  acuomuKjdation  of  the 
mails.  We  agree,  for  a  very  sinall  sum,  to  carry  them  lor  a  year.  You 
can  hardly  be  ignorant  that  if  the  same  car  was*  appropriated  to  any  other 
transportation,  it  would  pay  a  much  larger  sum.  We  are  always  ready  to 
perfiirrii  the  promised  service;  but  a  power  we  cannot  resist — and  patriot- 
ism forbids  that  we  should  resist  if  we  could — prevents  us  from  carrying 
the  mail,  and  yet  you  inflict  a  penalty  on  the  railroad  company  as  a  de- 
faulter, when  it  was  ready  and  willing  to  perform  the  required  service  but 
for  the  interposition  of  a  superior  power,   under  circumstances  of  public 


18 

necessity  afFecting  the  safety  of  the  very  government  of  which  you  are  a 
part,  and  which  it  is  your  duty  to  protect. 

Your  argument  is,  "  that  we  must  not  expect  compensation  for  what 
we  do  not  do."  On  this  assumption,  if  you  failed  to  give  us  any  mails 
to  carry  on  any  day,  though  we  ran  the  usual  car  empty  over  our  whole 
route,  we  must  he  fined,  because  we  carried  no  mails,  though  it  was  from 
your  own  default,  and  our  expenses  were  precisely  the  same  as  if  we  had 
carried  it. 

It  is  a  mockery  to  refer  us  to  the  war  department  to  compensate  us  for 
your  fines  for  obeying  their  order,  when  that  department  has  no  funds 
which  it  can  thua  appropriate. 

You  have  refused,  as  I  understand  you,  to  pay  this  company  for  services' 
actually  rendered,  because  I  have  declined  to  subject  the  company  to  sooie 
very  obnoxious  conditions.  If  the  services  are  rendered,  is  there  not  a 
moral  obligation  to  pay  for  them?  The  immoral  government  of  the  old 
Union  never  refused  payment  because  there  was  not  a  written  contract  to 
compel.  But  you  say  that  the  law  forbids  paying  for  such  services  without 
contracts. 

IIow  is  it  that  other  railroad  companies  have  been  paid  without  signing 
contracts  ?  I  understand  this  to  be  the  fact.  My  objections  I  know  are 
entertained  by  many  of  our  railroad  companies,  and  consequently  they 
have  not  signed  contracts,  but  nevertheless  they  have  been  paid,  as  /think 
they  should  have  been. 

The  practice  in  your  department  is  both  unjust  and  inconsistent,  and  if 
persisted  in,  must  drive  me  for  redress  to  some  other  source. 
Very  respectfully,  yours,  (fee. 

E.  FONTAINE,  President 


Hon.  J.  E.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


Va.  Central  R.  R.  Co. 


PosTOFFiCE  Department, 
Richmond,  April  20,  1864. 

Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  15th  instant,  in  answer  to  mine  of  the  llth,  is 
just  received.  It  exhibits  such  a  departure  from  the  ordinary  courtesies 
of  official  correspondence,  and  so  persistent  a  determination  to  misunder- 
stand and  misrepresent  what  was  said  with  the  sole  view  of  conceding 
every  thing  to  your  company  which  you  demanded,  which  could  be  con- 
ceded according  to  law  and  the  rules  of  right,  and  shows  so  manifest  % 
purpose  to  engage  in  useless  controversy,  that  I  can  see  no  good  which 
could  probably  arise  from  any  further  answer  to  it  than  to  acknowledge  its 
receipt,  and  to  say  that  no  desire  has,  in  any  way>  been  manifested  by  this 
department  to  make  any  other  exactions  or  to  impose  any  other  terms  on 
the  road  of  which  you  are  tiie  president,  than  those  which  are  made  of 
every  other  railroad  in  the  service. 

Very  respectfully, 

JOHN  n.  REAGAN,  P.  M.  GenereU. 
E.  Fontaine,  Esq.,  Pres.  Va.  Central  li,  R.  Co. 


Virginia  Central  RailroaDj 
P-esident's  Office,  JBeaverdam,  Va-,  April  22,  1864. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter,  stating  that  you  considered  mine  of  the  15th 
instant  discourteous,  has  been  received. 
Writing  under  some  little  excitement,  from  your  declimng  to  settle  with 


14 

this  compnny,  as  you  bad  done  •with  others  under  eimilar  cirourostances, 
I  used  ptrong  lanpnuage  to  illustrate  my  objections  to  the  contract  as  acted 
on  in  the  department ;  but  as  I  do  not  consider  discourtesy  any  more  jus- 
tifiable in  officiiil  than  in  private  correspondence,  although  you  have  done 
me  injustice  in  your  last  letter,  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  I  did 
not  mean  to  be  offensive,  nor  do  I  now  think  my  letter  is  justly  liable  to 
such  construction. 

My  pole  object  was  to  endeavor  to  explain  to  you  that  your  mode  of  en- 
forcing the  esecutii'H  of  the  contract,  though  not  designed,  nevertheless 
seemed  to  me  to  imply  that  the  president  and  directors  (f  railroad  compa- 
nies were  unworthy  of  confidence,  which  no  gentleman,  by  any  act  of  his, 
■would  be  willing  to  concede  even  by  implication,  and  to  call  your  atten- 
tion to  a  fact,  of  which  yu  might  not  be  aware,  that  an  odious  discrimina- 
tion wae  made  against  it  in  the  settlement  of  claims  with  your  department. 
Very  respectfully, 


Son.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


E.  FONTAINE,  President. 


PosTOFFiCE  Department, 
Eichmojid,  April  26,  1864. 

Sir, — In  answer  to  your  letter  of  the  22d  instant,  and  to  your  preceding 
letter  of  the  15th  instant,  I  would  say,  that  I  regret  you  should  have  sup- 
posed my  letter  of  the  11th  implied  any  reflection  on  the  officers  of  your 
company.  Nothing  was  farther  IVom  my  intention  :  the  object  of  that  let- 
ter being  to  remove  the  objections  Aviiich  you  had  to  executing  a  contract, 
and  to  show  you  that  two  of  the  three  objections  which  you  urged  were  re- 
moved by  the  previous  action  of  the  department,  and  that  they  should  re- 
main so,  if  desired  by  you,  by  provisions  in  the  contract.  The  third  point 
of  objection  which  you  pressed  is  one  which  has  come  up  in  our  corres- 
pondence with  many  of  the  railroad  companies ;  and  with  all  of  them  the 
department  has  acted  on  the  same  views  expressed  in  my  letter  of  the  11th 
to  you. 

in  your  letter  of  the  15th  and  of  the  22d  you  assume  that  the  depart- 
ment discriminates  between  your  company  and  other  companies,  by  requir- 
ing of  yours  the  execution  of  a  contract  before  payment  can  be  made,  while 
it  has  settled  with  others  without  this  requirement.  I  send  you  a  copy  of 
my  report  of  December  7th,  on  pages  10  and  11,  of  which  you  will  see  the 
rule  of  action  of  the  department  stated.  When  I  wrote  you  on  the  20th, 
my  impression  was  that  this  rule  had  been  departed  from  in  no  case,  as  it 
certainly  was  my  intention  it  should  not  be.  IJpoi  strict  examination,  I 
iiud  that  the  only  apparent  departure  from  it  has  been  in  the  case  of  the 
Richmond  and  Fredericksburg  railroad,  to  which  payment  has  once  been 
made  since  the  1st  of  July  1803,  without  a  contract.  1  understand  that 
was  made  under  the  apprehension  that,  as  the  company  could  not  perform 
the  service  on  the  whole  of  the  road,  it  was  not  necessary  for  it  to  execute 
a  contract.  This  was  a  mistaken  view,  and  that  company  will  be  required 
to  execute  a  contract  as  all  others  are  required  to  do.  This,  I  am  informed, 
was  the  only  case  in  which  a  payment  has  been  made  without  a  contract 
since  the  expiration  of  the  term  of  the  former  contracts.  These  facts,  I 
trust,  will  be  a  sufficient  assurance  to  you  that  no  discrimination  has  been 
made  against  your  company. 

Very  respectfully, 

JOHN  H.  REAGAN,  P.  M.  General 

E.  Pontaxne,  Esq.,  Pres.  Va.  Central  R.  R.  Co. 


15 

Extract  from  Report  abote  bsferred  to. 

"  Railroad  Service. 
« 

The  department  has  omitted  to  advertise  for  proposals  for  mail  service 
on  railroad  routes,  becaase  of  the  fact  that  it  is  authorized,  under  existing 
laws,  to  make  contracts  with  railroad  companies  without  advertisement; 
and  as  there  can  be  no  competition  for  such  service,  the  effect  of  an  adver- 
tisement would  simply  be  to  invite  proposals  for  an  increase  of  compensa- 
tion, whicli  could  not  be  granted  unless  the  postal  facilities  furnished  by 
the  route  should  have  so  increased  as  to  change  the  classification  of  tba 
road,  under  the  act  approved  May  9th,  1861. 

Most  of  the  railroad  presidents  have  executed  contracts  vrith  the  depart- 
ment for  the  transportation  of  the  mails  from  the  1st  of  July  1863;  but 
there  are  some  who  refuse  to  execute  contracts,  although  they  are  offcrei 
the  maximum  rate  of  compensation  for  the  first  class  roads.  At  the  same 
time  they  express  their  entire  willingness  to  carry  the  mails,  but  are  un- 
willing to  place  their  roads,  and  mail  service  on  them,  under  even  that 
limited  control  of  the  department,  which  is  necessary  to  give  regularity, 
certainty  and  security  to  the  service. 

The  only  remedies  for  the  evils  which  must  result  from  the  transporta- 
tion of  the  mails  w'thout  the  restraining  influence  of  contracts  for  its  faith- 
ful performance,  which  the  department  can  apply,  are,  1st,  to  withhold 
payments  for  services  performed  without  contract;  and  2d,  if  they  still  re- 
fuse to  contract,  then  to  withdraw  the  mails  from  such  roads,  and  endeavor 
to  obtain  some  other  mode  of  conveyance. 

In  view  of  the  requirements  of  the  law  upon  this  subject,  it  will  be  my 
duty  to  apply  these  remedies  to  all  roads  whose  presidents  persist  in  their 
refusal  to  comply  with  the  requirements  of  the  department  in  relation  t) 
contracts  ;  for,  although  the  practice  has  existed,  to  some  extent,  of  per- 
mitting the  mail  service  to  be  performed  on  railroads  without  contract?, 
and  paying  for  such  service  by  what  are  termed  "Orders  of  Recognition," 
Buch  practice  was  clearly  a  violation  of  the  law  which  forbids  payment  for 
mail  service  until  contracts  shall  have  been  executed  according  to  law  and 
the  regulations  of  the  department. 

Wealthy  corporate  monopolies  should  not  be  permitted  to  occupy  such  a 
position  in  relation  to  the  postal  service  of  the  country,  on  the  great  trunk 
lines  of  mail  communication,  as  would  place  such  service  completely  with- 
in their  control,  not  only  upon  the  main  lines,  but  also  upon  the  numerous 
minor  mail  routes  leading  therefrcm  ;  for  of  what  avail  would  it  be  for  the 
department  to  enforce  on  the  part  of  the  contractors  upon  these  latter 
lines,  a  strict  compliance  with  the  terms  of  their  contracts  in  relation  ti 
schedules  of  arrivals  and  departures  of  the  mails,  if  railroad  lines  are 
permitted  to  carry  the  mails  at  pleasure,  without  the  obligations  of  con- 
tracts to  compel  their  observance  of  fixed  schedules,  which  are  the  essentir.I 
element  in  a  great  net  work  of  post  routes  ?  It  would  be  unjust,  if  the  la^r 
would  tolerate  it,  to  relieve  them  of  conditions  which  are  required  of  all 
other  contractors. 

The  department  has  never  possessed,  or  attempted  to  exercise  any  other 
authority  over  the  schedules  of  arrivals  and  departures  of  mail  trains  upon 
railroads  than  that  necessary  to  require  them  to  run  in  conformity  with 
schedules  "agreed  on"  between  them  and  the  department;  and  these  scbe- 
dulea  have  usually  been  arranged  in  conventions  held  by  the  ofScere  of 
connecting  lines,  so  as  to  obtain  the  uniform  and  close  schedules  of  connec- 
tion required  by  their  own  interests. 

If  any  road,  forming  part  of  a  through  line  between  important  points 
he  permitted  to  carry  the  mails  without  executing  proper  contracts  fi,r 
the  faithful  performance  of  euch   eervice,  the  department  will  not  have 


16 


the  power  to  prevent  them  from  adopting  any  schedule  they'  may  deem 
best  suited  to  their  local  business,  without  regard  to  their  effect  upon  the 
regularity  of  the  mails  on  their  own  lines,  or  of  their  proper  connections 
with  others." 


Virginia  Cjsntbal  Railroad,,. 
President's  Office,  Richmond,   Ya.,  May  3,  1864. 

Dear  Sir, — Your  letter  of  the  26th  ultimo  was  received  during  the  ab- 
sence of  several  days  on  the  line  of  the  road. 

I  do  not  propose  to  continue  the  discussion  of  the  subject  of  our  correa- 
pondence,  but  desire  to  say  that  I  never  have  objected  to  a  contract  that 
would  enable  you  to  secure  the  important  objects  for  which  you  say  in  your 
report  contracts  should  be  made,  and  that  no  penalty,  however  severe, 
could  have  made  this  company  more  considerate  of  the  public  interest 
than  they  have  been  without  a  contract.  But  my  objections  to  your  mode 
of  enforcing  the  contract,  as  set  forth  in  my  letter  of  the  15th  uUimo,  re- 
main unchanged.  At  this  critical  juncture  in  our  political  affairs,  I  have 
neither  time  nor  disposition  to  agitato  a  matter  which,  in  a  'pecuniary  point 
of  vieiv,  is  of  such  trivial  importance. 

I  shall  therefore  suspend  all  remedial  actions  for  the  present.  I  will 
merely  add,  that  Mr.  Barbour  informed  me  that  he  had  settled  with  the 
department  without  a  contract,  and  Mr.  Daniel  states  that  he  has  settled 
more  than  once. 

Very  respectfully, 

E.  FONTAINE,  President. 

Eon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General. 


Virginia  Central  Railroad, 
General  Sitpi's  Office,  Richmond,  Ya.,  July  28,  1864. 

Sir, — I  am  instructed  by  the  president  of  this  company  to  say  that  his 
duty  to  the  stockholders  will  not  allow  him  to  continue  the  use  of  a  car 
by  you  for  the  mails  and  your  agents,  without  compensation.  The 
mails  have  been  carried  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  public  for  more  than 
twelve  months,  and  you  are  understood  to  refuse  to  pay  anything  for  this 
service. 

I  am  required  to  adopt  some  plan  by  which  the  company  will  get  remu- 
neration for  the  use  of  the  large  space  heretofore  occupied  by  your  depart- 
ment. At  the  same  time  the  president  has  no  desire  to  punish  the  people 
of  Virginia  and  the  soldiers  of  our  army,  by  rejecting  the  mail,  even  though 
you  persist  in  what  he  regards  your  course  of  injustice. 

If  the  existing  difficulties  are  not  settled,  on  and  after  the  1st  of  August 
1  shall  demand  of  all  your  agents  the  payment  of  the  usual  fare  for  first 
class  passengers,  where  they  travel  with  the  mail,  and  shall  also  limit  the 
space  to  be  occupied  by  the  mail. 

I  am  instructed  by  the  president,  however,  to  say  that  he  is  now,  as  he 
always  has  been,  willing  to  sign  any  reasonable  and  proper  contract,  which 
will  preclude  the  unlimited  right  of  construction  heretofore  exercised  by 
the  department,  which  induced  him  to  decline  signing  the  one  offered  hj 
you. 

Very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

H.  D.  WHITCOMD,  Gen.  Sup. 

Hon.  J.  E.  Reagan,^  P.  M.  General. 


17 

RicnuoND,  July  19,  18C4. 

^  SiR_ — I  have  henn  directed  by  the  postmaster  general  to  acknowled2;c  the 
receipt  of  your  letter  of  the  28th  instant,  and  to  state  that  it  was  his  ira- 
•pression  that  tiie  principal  objection  advanced  by  Mr.  Fontaine,  president 
of  the  Virginia  Central  railroad,  against  the  conditions  which  have  always 
becn'lfniiiraced  in  railroad  contracts  made  with  this  department  (and  which 
/'are  identical  in  every  particular'with  those  u.-ied  in  the  United  States  post 
office  department  Iroru  the  commencement  of  railroad  transportation  of 
mails),  had  been  satisfactorily  met  by  him  in  the  correspondence  between 
them.  'As  the  difliculties  still  existing  with  Mr.  Fontaine  are  not  pointed 
out. in  your  note,  and  are  not  understo'id  in  their  precise  force  by  the  de- 
pautnient,  I  take  the  liberty  of  enclosing  a  blank  form  of  contract,  with  tiio 
request  that  you  immediately  submit  the  same  to  the  president,  and  have 
him  interline' and  alter  the  conditions  therein  so  as  to  conform  to  his  wishes, 
in  order  that  they  may  be  considered  by  the  postmaster  genera). 
Kespectfullv, 

IL  ST.  GEO.  OFFUTT, 

Chief  Contract  Bureau. 
n.  D.   Whitcomh,  Esq.,   Gen.  Supt.   Va.  Central  R.  R. 


Beaterdam,  July  30,  1864. 

Dear  Sir, — Yours,  enclosing  one  from  Jlr.  OfFutt,  is  received,  in  which 
bo  requests  me  to  repeat  niyjj^jections  to  signing  the  contract  which  the 
postoffice  department  has  prepared.  I  informed  the  postmaster  general,  in 
my  last  letter  on  the  subject,  that  my  objections  were  not  satisfied,  and  that 
I  delayed  action  because  just  at  that  time  the  very  critical  condition  of  the 
country  made  it  inopportune  to  do  so. 

Mv  objections  are  the  same  which  have  been  stated  before,  and  if  I  am 
correctly  informed,  are  entertained  by  many  others  besides  myself.  It  i.s 
'true  that  the  provisions  are  identical  with  those  contained  in  the  contracts 
of  the  old  government,  but  the  powers  cfainied  under  these  provisions  and 
the  practice  of  the  departmeut  is  very  different,  otherwise  there  would 
have  been  no  complaint. 

Ist.  I  object  to  the  broad  power  exercised  by  the  postmaster  general,  of 
giving  his  own  interpretation  of  the  contract,  deciding  for  himself  without 
appeal,  when  the  coutnict  is  not  complied  with.  Immediately  connected 
'therewith,  I  object  to  his  practice  of  exacting  the  payment  of  a  fine,  under 
the  rigid  enforcement  of  the  letter  of  the  contract,  when  it  is  shown  that 
there  was  no  dereliction  of  duty,  but  the  company  was  prevented  from  do- 
ing what  was  demanded,  by  cau.-ies  over  which  they  ha^  no  control,  aa  iu 
the  case  of  the  appropriation  of  the  whole  motive  power  of  the  company, 
by  authority  of  the  war  department,  at  some  critical  moment,  for  public 
defence.  In  view  of  this  practice,  and  the  exercise  of  the  sole  right  of  in- 
terpretation, the  company  must  have  some  protection  against  the-  possible 
abuse  of  powers  which  may  be  claimed  under  clauses  1,  5,  G  and  7. 

2d.  The  first  article  gives  the  "exclusive  use"  of  the  mail  apartment  to 
"  the  department  and  its  mail  agent."  The  postmaster  general  has  conceded 
that  it  is  proper  that  some  officers  of  the  company  should  be  allowed  to 
travel  in  this  car,  to  see  that  no  use  is  made  of  it  not  contemplated  by  a 
proper  interpretation  of  the  contract,  and  nevertheless  he  refuses  admission 
to  the  directors  of  the  company,  who,  together  with  the  president,  are  the 
only  specially  appointed  guardians  of  its  interests. 

3d.  Upon  the  ex-parte  report  of  some  subordinate,  he  enters  up  fines, 
without  notification  of  the  charge;  and  the  contractor  only  knows  that  he  is 
o 


18 

considered  subject  to  the  fine,  when  he  comes  to  settle  for  his  mail  service. 
This  is  contrary  to  the  practice  of  the  old  government,  whose  form  of  con- 
tract has  been  literally  copied.  It  is  in  violation  of  the  common  princi- 
ples of  justice.  It  is  like  condemning  a  man  to  be  hunp,  and  not  giving 
bim  an  opportunity  for  defence  until  the  day  of  his  execution. 

My  objections  are  entertained  more  against  the  principle  of  giving  pow- 
ers which  may  be  abused,  than  on  account  of  the  pecuniary  amoant  in- 
Tolved. 

I  do  not  know  whether  interlineation  will  correct  these  objections.  I 
will,  however,  examine  to  see  ;  hut  I  desire  you  to  show  this  to  Mr.  Offutt, 
and  hope  he  will  recognize  the  justice  of  providing  for  the  points  of  ob- 
jection. , 

I  can  never  consent  to  have  the  directors  excluded  from  the  mail  car ; 
and  there  must  be  some  restraint  on  the  power  of  fining  without  notice,' 
when  there  is  good  cause  for  the  mlleged  delinquencies.  If  this  is  done  I 
will  be  satisfied.  I  think  there  should  be  some  mode  pointed  out  for  set- 
tling differences,  say — a  reference  to  the  Secretary  of  War,  or  a  board  ef 
referees.  I  will  now  see  what  I  can  do  on  the  contract  sent,  by  interlining 
the  suggested  modifications. 

Very  respectfully, 

E.  FONTAINE. 
H.  D.  Whitcomh,  Esq. 


PosTOFFiCE  Department, 
Richmond,  August  1,  1864. 

Sir,  On  the  28th  of  July  ultimo,  I  received  from  II.  D.  Whitcomb,  Esq., 
general  superintendent  of  the  Virginia  Central  railroad,  a  letter  which 
appears  to  have  been  written  by  your  direction,  in  which  he  says,  "  I  am 
instructed  by  the  president  of  the  company  to  say  that  his  duty  to  the 
stockholders  will  not  allow  him  to  continue  the  use  of  a  car  by  you  for  the 
mails  and  your  agents  without  compensation.  The  mails  have  been  carried 
to  the  satisfaction  of  the  public  for  more  than  twelve  months,  and  you  are 
understood  to  refuse  to  pay  any  thing  for  this  service.  I  am  required  to 
adopt  some  plan  by  which  the  company  will  get  remuneration  for  the  large 
space  heretofore  occupied  by  your  department.  At  the  same  time  the  pre- 
sident has  no  desire  to  punish  the  people  of  Virginia  and  the  soldiers  of 
our  army  by  rejecting  the  mail,  even  though  you  persist  in  what  he  regards 
your  course  of  injustice. 

"  If  the  existing  diflBculties  are  not  settled,  on  and  after  the  first  of  Au- 
gust I  shall  demand  of  all  your  agents  the  payment  of  the  usual  fare  for 
first  class  passengers,  when  they  travel  with  the  mail,  and  shall  also  limit 
the  space  to  be  occupied  by  the  mail. 

"  I  am  also  instructed  by  the  president,  however,  to  say  that  he  is  now, 
as  he  always  has  been,  willing  to  sign  any  resonable  and  proper  contract, 
which  will  preclude  the  unlimited  right  of  construction  heretofore  exercised 
by  the  department,  which  induced  him  to  decline  signing  the  one  offered 
by  you." 

In  answer  to  this  and  pursuant  to  my  instructions,  the  chief  of  the  con- 
tract bureau  of  this  department  on  the  same  day  inclosed  to  Superintendent 
"Whitcomb  a  blank  copy  of  a  contract,  with  the  request  that  he  submit  it 
to  you  for  such  interlineations  and  modifications  as  would  meet  your  views, 
in  order  that  we  might  have  a  precise  view  of  your  objections  to  the  form 
of  contract  which  is  used  by  this  department,  and  has  been  signed  by  the 
officers  of  the  other  railroad  companies  of  the  Confederacy  generally,  » 
copy  of  which  was  sent  you  for  execution  on  the  seventh  of  September, 


19 

1863.  On  this  morning  Mr,  "Whitcomb  returned  this  form  of  contract,  with 
your  notes  and  interlineations,  accompanied  by  a  letter  from  you  to  him,  in 
■which  you  re-state  your'objections  to  signing  a  contract  in  the  usual  form  ; 
and  in  his  note  he  says,  "  Trusting  that  this  disagreeable  subject  will  soon 
be  satisfactorily  settled,  I  shall  not  issue  the  order  relative  to  the  agents  of 
the  department,  unless  farther  directioif's  are  given  mc." 

Your  objections  to  signing  the  usual  form  of  contract  made  with  railroad 
companies  are  substantially  the  same  which  you  have  heretofore  submitted 
to  the  department,  and  my  answer  uMist  be  substantially  the  same  that  I 
have  heretofore  made  you  in  several  communications  on  this  subject. 

The  form  of  contract  used  by  this  department  is  the  one  wLich  has  been 
used  with  every  railroad  company  which  has  contracted  to  carry  the  mails 
for  the  Confederate  States  since  the  organization  of  our  government ;  and 
it  is  a  literal  copy,  in  all  its  conditions,  of  the  fi>rm  of  contract  which  had 
been  used  by  the  government  of  the  United  States  for  many  years  before 
the  organization  of  our  government.  But  you  say  that  it  is  more  to  the 
construction  of  the  contract  and  the  action  of  the  department,  to  which  you 
object,  that  the  form  of  the  contract.  The  same  rule  of  construction  of 
the83  contracts  and  the  practice  under  them,  prevail  in  this  department 
which  prevailed  under  the  old  government;  and  the  same  rules  and  prac- 
tice are  applied  to  the  road  of  which  you  are  president,  that  are  applied  to 
all  other  roads  in  the  Confederate  States. 

You  make  substantially  three  objections  to  signing  the  usual  contract 
with  the  department : 

1st.  That  the  department  claims  the  exclusive  use  and  control  of  tho 
mail  cars. 

2d.  That  the  department  makes  deductions  from  the  mail  pay  of  the- 
company  for  services  not  performed  by  it. 

3d.  That  the  department  makes  deductions  and  imposes  fines  for  non- 
performance of  service,  without  notice  to  the  railroad  cumpanies  previous 
to  the  settlement  of  their  quarterly  accounts. 

I.  In  answer  to  your  first  objection,  I  would  say  that  you  were  advised' 
by  my  letter  of  the  8th  of  July,  1SG3,  and  by  a  subsequent  letter  of  the 
11th  of  April,  1864,  "  that  the  rule  excluding  all  persons  from  the  mail  cars 
had  been  so  far  modified,  and  corresponding  directions  given  to  our  agents 
on  all  railroads,  as  to  allow  the  presidents  and  superintendents  of  railroads 
to  travel  in  the  mail  cars  when  they  wished  to  do  so,  and  that  conductors 
should  at  all  times  be  allowed  to  pass  through  and  examine  the  mail  cars, 
to  prevent  any  thing  improper  from  being  conveyed  in  them." 

After  you  were  notified  of  this  modification  of  the  rule  of  the  depart- 
ment admitting  presidents  and  superintendents  of  railroads  to  ride  in  the 
mail  cars,  you  set  up  a  claim  that  the  same  privilege  should  be  allowed-  the 
directors  of  the  road  of  which  you  are  president.  It  is  proper  to  say  that 
such  a  claim  has  not  been  made  in  behalf  of  the  directors  of  any  other  road 
in  the  Confederacy. 

The  department  is  not  advised  of  the  number  of  the  directors  of  your 
road,  nor  of  the  frequency  of  the  trips  they  might  wish  to  make  in  the  mail 
cars ;  nor  can  it  know  how  many  of  them  might  present  themselves  for 
passage  in  the  mail  cars  at  any  one  trip,  nor  whether  the  mail  cars  would 
have  sufficient  capacity  to  convey  t):e  mails  and  all  the  persons  for  whom 
you  claim  this  privilege.  While  the  oflicial  character  of  the  persons  for 
\s-hoin  the  privilege  is  required  mi;;li:  be  regarded  as  a  sufficient  guarantee 
of  the  security  of  the  mails  against  depre-Jation,  it  must  be  rememhered 
that  it  is  also  essential  that  the  muil  agent  shall  have  sufBcieut  room  to 
empty  the  mail  bags,  assort,  distribute  and  rebag  the  mail  matter.  This  he 
cannot  do  in  a  car  occupied  by  numerous  passengers.  And  the  department 
cannot  consent  that  the  postal  service  shall  be  rendered  liable  to  iaterrup- 


20 

tion  from  such  a  cause.  If  this  last  demanded  concession  were  made,  what 
assurance  has  ahe  department  tliat  a  demand  will  nut  fallow  fitr  tlie  same 
privilege  fur  all  the  stockholders  of  the  road?  Aifti  why  not  for  tlicm  as 
well  as  for  the  directors  ?  There  is  at  least  as  muuh  reason  to  expect  this 
as  there  was  to  expect  that,  when  jou  had  been  informed  that  the  president 
and  superintendents  of  railroads  were  to  he  allowed  to  ride  in  the  mail 
cars,  you  WDuM  then  demand,  as  a  cundition,  that  the  directors  andtrea- 
surer  should  have  the  ssame  privilege,  or  yon  would  cease  to  carry  the 
mails.  If  tliid  privilege  sh(juld  be  extended  to  the  directors  of  your  road, 
a  like  privilege  must  l)e  extended  to  the  directors  of  all  ether  companies. 
I  cannot  consent  to  this  extension  of  the  rule  aj^ainst  the  admission  of  un- 
sworn and  unauthorized  persons  into  the  mail  cars,  as  well  because  gf  the 
emb  ii-rassmeut  which  such  a  course  would  proha'oly  entail  on  the  a>i;cnts  of 
the  de|iarLment  and  the  postal  service,  as  because  it  would  be  a  clear  said 
manifest  violation  of  the  spirit  of  the  law,  looking  to  the  security  of  the 
mails,  thus  to  expose  them  to  tlio  forbearance  of  whole  classes  of  persons, 
who,  if  they  did  not  themselves  interfere  with  them,  would,  by  their  pre- 
sence, destroy  the  responsibility  of  our  agents,  by  putting  it  in  their  pewer, 
in  case  of  loss  or  impropriety,  to  say  that  there  were  so  many  other's  pre- 
sent they  could  not  be  hidrl  responsible  for  a  wrong  which  it  was  equally  in 
tbe  power  of  any  one  of  them  to  imve  committed. 

II.  In  answer  to  your  second  objection,  I  have  to  say,  as  I  have  hereto- 
fore said  to  jou,  that  the  department  contracts  fjr  the  carrying  of  the  mails 
a  specified  number  of  trips,  upon  a  schedule  of  arrivals  and  departures 
agreed  on.  It  pays  for  the  trips  of  service  perfu-med,  and  refuses  to  pay 
for  .-ervice  not  perf  )rmed.  The  precise  fiicts  on  which  this  objection  is 
Vased  are,  that  oa  occasions  the  "  whole  motive  power  of  the  [your]  com- 
pany" is  npfiropriated,  "by  authority  of  the  war  department,"  by  which 
you  are  prevented  from  carrying  the  mails.  In  such  a  case  the  department 
refuses  to  pay  you  fjr  the  service  which  you  do  ni  t  perform,  and  fur  which 
you  insist  the  company  ought  to  Ijc  paid.  Why?  Your  "whole  motive 
power"  is  employed,  by  the  authority  of  the  war  department,  in  the  service 
of  thai;  department,  and  not  in  the  postal  service;  and  the  war  department 
pays  your  company  fir  that  service.  '  Up(m  what  principle 'do  you  demand 
also  to  be  paid  by  the  post  oftice  department  fur  service  which  there  is  no 
pretension  of  your  having  performed,  and  when  the  war  department  was 
paying  you  for  tlie  use  of  your  "  whole  motive  power  ?"  The  rule  of  this 
department,  under  which  it  refuses  to  pay  you  fur  what  you  never  did,  is 
applied  to  all  other  companies  just  as  it,  is  to  yours,  and  seems  to  me  so 
manifestly  just  that  I  must  express  my  surprise  that  it  should  be  seriously 
questioned  in  its  application  to  such  a  state  of  facts. 

III.  Ln  answer  to  your  third  objection,  I  would  say,  that  under  the, laws 
and  regulations  relating  to  tiie  postal  service,  and  under  the  contrai;t  .and 
accompanying  schedules  of  arrivals  and  departures  of  the  mails,  a  i'ailure 
of  the  mails  cannot  occur  on  your  road  without  the  knowledge  of  y-tur  oH- 
cers  and  agents ;  and  it  is  made  the  duty  of  all  mail  contractors,  on  the 
occurrence  of  failures,  to  render  a  sneciiic  excuse,  setting  fortii  particularly 
the  cause  of  failure,  as  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  chapter  33  of  the  Regu- 
lations of  the  Department,  wliich  was  in  force  for  many  years  in  the  United 
States  before  its  adoption  by  us.  If  failures  occur,  and  the  contractor,  with 
full  knowledge  of  the  fact  and  of  the  necessity  of  rendering  an  excuse  for 
it;  fails  to  do  so,  tlie  department  proceeds  to  make  its  deductions  on  the  set- 
tlement of  the  quarterly  account  of  the  contractor.  But  in  the  case  of  rail- 
roads, the  department  has  so  far  modified  this  rule,  as  you  were  informed 
in  my  letter  of  April  il,  18G4,  as  to  furnish  the  companies,  on  the  settle- 
ment of  their  accounts,  with  a  statement  of  any  f.iilures  which  m;iy  have, 
occurred,  and  for  which  deductions  have  been  maue,  giving  the  dates  and 


21 

places  nt  which  the  failores  r.ccnrred.  And  the  rtppartment  cnriFeutp  jifter- 
wards  to  re-open  the  acQ^>iint",  if  the  company  wishes  t.-  present  evirleiice  to 
excuse  its  failures!.  But,  in  such  ca=e.-5  an  acccu:  t  -n-ilJ  only  be  re->'perod 
when  it;ippe:irs  that  the  company  miirht  have  been  tiiken  by  Furin-i.-e  hj 
the  action  of  the  department,  or  when,  from  any  other  aiuse,nianirej.t  in- 
juKtii-e  WKtiM  be  done  the  company  by  a  refusal  to  re-open  the  fi(?CiU''t.  In 
a  pimple  case  of  neglect  or  refusaf  .on  the  part  of  the  oompany  1  <  send  in 
the 'necessary  excuse  at  the  proper  time,  when  it  had  knuwlrdjie  if  the 
failure  and  of  the  necessity  for  the  excuse,  the  account  would  not  bv  re- 
opened, and  the  deduction  would-be  required  to  stand. 

I  eticlnse  to  you  herewith,  a  copy  :if  the  circular  seftt  by  this  depnrtinrnt 
to  ruiitractor.o- whenever  deductions  li  ive  been  made  from  their  pny.  strring 
the  amount  of  deductions  and  dates  o.f  the  failures  for  which  tb.  v  ■  :■■   m   ''e. 
and  pettinp;  forth  the  rules  and  reast  ns  on  which  these  dedi.i 
I  also  send  you  herewith  a  copy  oT  the  circular  sent  by  the  <'■■  ,  o 

all  contractors  on  whom  fines  are  imposed,  statino;  the  amount  ot  tic  lines 
and  the  dates  of  the  delinquencies  for  which  they  are  impose  i,  and  i''v!ng 
the  rules  and  reasons  for  esactinp;  them.  The  rules  on  which  fines  rr.o  tm- 
po^ed  and  deductions  made,  and  the  practice  of  the  department  »it;der 
them,  hi^vo  the  sai'.ction  of  lony;  use  and  the  approval  of  a  lon^  Hrerif  pi.»t- 
masters.jreneral  under  the  old  ;;overnment,  as  well  as  of  the  uniform  prac- 
tice of  this  jiovernment  for  more  than  three  years.  I  have  carefully  ci,n- 
sidered  y,our  objectiort*  to  them,  but  can  see  no  renson  which  ca'ls  for  a 
'  change,  and  mu<t  adhere,  in  the  case  of  your  road  as  well  as  of  all  others, 
to  the;exi'-tini;re<iulations  and  practice. 

In  your  l<-tier  y^nu  propose  the  creaticTJ  of  a  new  tribunal  to  settle  differ- 
ences of  opinion  between  the  department  and  its  contractors.  This  would 
re(]uire  the  action  of  the  Iep;islative  department  of  the  covernrnent.  if  any 
were  necessury.  There  is  i\p  complaint  or  pretence  that  the  department 
fails  or  refuses,  to  pay  contractors  for  all  the  services  performed  by  thrm. 
But  your  complaint  is  that  the  department  refuses  to  pay  your  company  for 
service  which  it  does  not.pci  form,  and-when  it  is  receiving  pay  from  another 
department  of  t^e  government  for  the  use  of  its  "  whole  motive  power,"  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  mails.  This  is  not  a  question  of  rules  or  practice  of  80 
doubtful  import  as  to  pive  rise  to*  differences  of  opinion,  which  might  be 
adjusted  by  an  appellate  tribunal,  but  is  simply  a  question  as  to  whether 
the  department,  in  disregard  of  the  laws  and  regulations  for  its  government 
and  of  the  terms  of  the  contract  with  its  carrier,  should  pay  for  service 
never  performed  It  is  proper  to  say,  however,  that  if,  in  the  settlement  of 
the  accounts  of  a  contractor  by  this  department,  he  believes  injustice  has 
been  «ione  him,  he  has  the  right  of  appeal  from  the  auditor  to  the  comp- 
troller, wherehecan  have  a  reh'^aring  and  a  re- examination  of  the  ca^^e.  This 
is  the  provision  made  by  la^  to  "secure  both  contractors  and  the  department 
against  errors  of  decision,  or  disregard  of  law  and  the  provisions  of  con- 
tracts, by  the  oflBcers  of  parties  concerned :  and  I  have  no  autltority,  if  I 
supposed  it  proper  to  do  so,  to  agree  to  any  other  appellate  tribunal. 

Another  point  presented  in  the  notice  of  Superintendent  Whitcoml',  is 
that  unless  the  department  shall  pay  your  company  for  the  services  per- 
fnrined  since  the  first  of  July,  IS'63,  it  will  refuse  to  carry  the  mails. 

The  department  found  it  necessiiry  ta  insist  that  the  railroad  companies 
should  enter  into  contract  with  it,  in  or§er  to  give  it  the  necessary  power  t6 
control  the  schedules  and  giv^^  regularity  and  reliability  to  the  mails. 
Whore  (companies,  as  was  the  ca-e  with  yours,  refuse  to  enter  intu  cint'  acts 
and  thus  to  become  amenable  to  the  lawsand  regulations  governiri:  O-c  ser- 
vice, o\ir  oidy  alternative  was  to  refuse  payment  to  such  companies  for  eer- 
vice  until  they  should  consent  t^  cnier  into  the  usual  contract.  You  have 
been,  I  believe,  repeatedly  nrtified  that  whenever  you  shbuM  cntsr  into 


22 

contract  with  the  department,  your  past  service  would  be  recognized  and 
your  company  paid,  and  that  you  would  not  be  paid  until  such  contract  was 
made.  I  now  repeat  that  I  shall  not  authorize  payment  to  your  company 
until  it  shall  enter  into  contract.  But  if  it  chooses  to  enter  into  tlie  usual 
contract,  I  will  then  recognize  its  past  service,  and  direct. payment  to  be 
made  for  it.  The  question  is  not  fairly  presented  when  you  say  you  will 
not  carry  the  mails  lonj^er,  unless  the  department  pay  you  for  past  services. 
You  have  from  the  first  been  notified  that  the  departmerit  would  not  pav 
you  for  service  unless  you  would  enter  into  contract.  On  receiving;  that 
notice,' it  was  at  your  option  to  refuse  or  to  continue  to  carry  the  mails.  If 
you  chose  to  go  on,  the  department  had  the  right  to  expect  that  you  intended 
to  enter  into  contract  as  it  required. 

Altogether,  you  insist  on  a  change  of  the  Kules  and  Regulations  of  the 
Department  to  suit  your  views.  You  demand,  as  a  condition  absolute  to 
your  continuance  to  carry  the  mails,  that  the  department  shall  allow  you 
to  determine  who  shall  ride  in  the  mail  cars — a  demand  which  it  is  not 
probable  was  ever  before  made  in  the  history  of  railroad  service,  and  which 
has  certainly  not  been  made  by  any  company  in  the  Confederate  State?. 
And  you  demand  pay  for  service  which  you  do  not  pretend  to  have  per- 
formed, and  say  you  will  not  continue  to  carry  the  mails,  unless  the  de- 
partment will  consent  to  pay  you  for  past  service  without  your  entering 
into  contract.  This  department  cannot  concede  any  of  these  demands,  as 
you  have  been  repeatedly  informed.  If,  upon  these  facts,  you  choose  to 
rafuse  to  carry  the  mails,  it  only  remains  for  the  department  to  provide  the- 
next  best  service  it  can,  and  to  notify  the  public  that  you  refuse  to  carry 
the  mails  for  the  government  and  people  on  the  terms  and  conditions  on 
•which  they  are  carried  by  all  other  railroads,  and  because  the  department 
■will  not  yield  to  your  demand  of  stipulations  and  conditions  which  are 
unlawful,  against  sound  policy,  and  one  of  them  unconscionable. 

The  course  you  propose  to  adopt  is  one  which  must  so  seriously  affect 
the  interests  of  the  people  at  large  and  of  the  government  and  army,  that 
I  would  respectfully  request  that  you  consent  to  submit  the  matter  to  your 
board  of  directors  before  you  take  final  action,  and  allow  them  to  examine 
the  whole  correspondence  between  us,  a  full  copy  of  which  I  will  h:ive 
prepared  for  the  purpose,  if  you  request- it, 
Very  respectfully, 

JOHN  II.  REAGAN,  P.  M.  General. 
E.  Fontaine,  Esq.,  Pres,  Va.  Ceiiiral  R.  R.  Co. 


Confederate  States  of  America, 
Post  Office  Department,  186 

Sir: 

A  deduction  of  %  has  been  made   from  your   pay,  as 

contractor  on  Route  No.  ,  for 

This  has  been  done  upon  the  principle,  expressly  stated  in  the  adver- 
tisement for  proposals,  and  inserted  in  all  the  contr.icts  of  this  depart- 
ment for  the  transportation  of  the  tnnils,  that  "in  all  cases  there  is  to  be  a 
forfeiture  of  the  pay  of  the  trip  when  the  trip  is  not  run."  ■ 

You  are  reminded  of  the  necessity  iff  prompflj/  forwarding  tn  this  office 
any  excuse  which  you  may  desire  J)  offer  for  a  failure  or  delinquency,  and 
that  "  a  specific  excuse"  is  required,  and  "general  allegations"  are  not 
admitted.  It  is  also  important,  where  an  excuse  is  tendered  for  having 
failed  to  perform  a  trip  or  half  trip.-  that  you  state  in  it  whether  any,  and 
if  any,  what  effort  was  made  to  perforin  the  service. 

To  entitle  an  excuse  for  any  failure  or  delinquency  to  be  considered,  it 
IS  REQUIRED  that  the  facts  stated  in  it  be  in  all  cases  veiified  by  the  affidavit 

/ 


23 

of  the  person  having  a  personal  knowledge  of  them,  or  by  the  official  cet- 
tificaj^tof  a  postmaster. 

If,  alter  waiting  a  reasonable  time,  no  specific  and  satisfactory  excuse  be 
received,  the  case  will  be  presented  to  the  postmaster  general  for  his  action, 
and  no  fine  or  deduction  will  be  remitted  on  any  excuse  rendered  after  the 
decision  is  made. 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

,  in  charge  of  Inspection  office. 


[No.  3.] 

Confederate  States  of  America, 
Post  Office  Department,  186 

Sir: 

The  postmaster  general  has  adopted  the  following  Regulations 
for  the  government  of  this  office,  viz  : 

"  Inasmuch  as  failures  to  arrive  at  the  end  of  their  routes  and  other 
points  within  contract  time  cannot  but  be  known  in  all  cases  to  contrac- 
tors or  their  agents,  it  cannot  be  necessary  to  give  them  information  thereof 
when  reported  by  postmasters  ;  and  it  is  considered  their  duty  to  send  to 
the  department  forthwith  their  excuses  for  such  failures,  if  any  they  have  : 
Therefore, 

Ordered,  That  no  notice  be  given  to  contractors  of  failures  to  arrive  at 
any  post  office  in  contract  time  as  reported  by  postmasters  to  the  depart- 
ment; and  if  no  excuse  be  received  from  them  within  a  reasonable  time, 
the  chief  clerk  is  directed  to  present  the  case  thus  reported  to  the  post- 
master general  for  fine. 

Ordered,  That  a  specific  excuse  be  required  for  each  specific  delin- 
quency of  any  contractor,  and  that  general  allegations  be  not  admitted. 
If  bad  roads  be  alleged,  a  specific  report  must  be  made  of  what  portion  of 
the  road  was  so  bad  as  to  obstruct  the  mails,  and  what  was  its  peculiar 
condition.  If  high  water,  it  must  be  shown  what  water  courses  were  im- 
passable ;  and  so  of  all  other  excuses." 

Should  you  at  any  time  fail  to  arrive  at  the  end  of  your  route,  or  any 
intermediate  post  office,  where  time  of  arrival  is  fixed,  within  the  time 
specified  in  your  contract  or  schedule,  it  will  be  expected  of  you  imme- 
diately, by  yourself  or  agent,  to  send  your  excuse  to  this  office,  setting 
forth  particularly  the  cause  of  your  failure,  and  what  efibrt,  if  any,  was 
made  to  perform  the  trip,  together  with  the  exact  dates  and  number  of  the 
route ;  and  if,  after  waiting  a  reasonable  time,  no  specific  and  satisfactory 
excuse  be  received,  the  case  will  be  presented  to  the  postmaster  general  for 
fine ;  and  no  fine  or  deduction  will  be  remitted  on  any  excuse  rendered 
after  the  decision  is  |^ade. 

You  have  been  fined  § 

for  failures  at 

on  the 
on  Route  No. 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

,  in  charge  of  Inspection  Office. 


Virginia  Central  Railroad, 
President's  Office,  Beaverdam,  Va.,  August  6,  1863. 
Hon.  J.  H.  Reagan,  P.  M.  General, 

Sir, — I  have  received  your  letter  of  the  1st  instant,  in  which  you  declare 
your  purpose  of  with-holding  payment  for  the  mail  services  of  this  com- 
pany actually  rendered,  and  I  regret  to  find  that  to  sustain  this  act  of  arbi- 


L'4 

trary  pnvver  in  dning  palpuMe  injustice,  ynu  have  resorted  tu  uncandid 
statenip.nts  and  imfair  nrguinni's,  ail  ol  whicli  I  tliink  will  be  urumiuriced 
by  persons  free  frum  \iiur  escitemi^nt  tu  lie  unti^cAmnig  the  hi<;l)  pnsitiun 
yon  occupy  in  our  government.* 

Y(  u  refuse  payment  for  past  services  actually  rendered  to  the  eati.-fac- 
tion  (if  the  public,  duiing  more  tlian  twelve  iininiiis,  because  I  decline  to 
sign  the  contracts  which  vdu  have  pvepiired  ;  contracts  the  cnnstrucni'ti  and 
enforcement  of  which  under  tlic  :iuthnr:ty  ilainieil  and  exercised  by  yi>u, 
are  ohjected  to  by  other  railroad  Pre>-idi'iiis.  a>:  well  as  myself.  Contracts 
80  ^scejitible  of  abuse  (as  thewn  h\  i-xperiencc)  in  your  hands,  tliat  a 
gentleman  of  high  standing,  as  a  Railroad  Piesiiient,  and  in  every  other 
capacity,  says  in  a  recent  letter  to  nie.  '  I  would  not  sign  them  because  of 
objectionable  jiowers  reserved  in  th^m  to  the  post  office  department,  aiid  6t 
arbitrary  and  unreasonable  authority  claimed  to  be  exercised  under  them; 
nor  <Ji>  1  iuteiul  to  do  so  while  Uiose  olijutionvhle  piwi^ioiis  and  prcici  ices- 
continue"  Yonr  course  heretofore  in  construing  and  enforcing  the  contract 
you  require  me  to  sign,  is  regarded  liy  others  than  myself  as  arbitraiy  and 
unreatio  liable,  and  because  I  am  not  willing  to  give  you  powerover  njy  com- 
pany, which  may  again  be  abused,  yuu  havc'  resolved  to  do  an  act  of  moral 
injustice  in  your  official  character  lot  called  for  hy  a  public  purj.io>e  to  be 
subserved,  and  which  I  am  sure  the  people  ()f  the  Southern  C(jnfederacy 
will  noti  approve,  although  it  may  put  a  little  money  in  their  treasury. 
You  say  that  contracts  are  necessary  to  ensure  the  regularity  of  mail  trans- 
portation on  connecting  routes.  You  have  tried  this  company,  the  Rich- 
mond, Fredericksburg  &  Potomac,  and  the  Orange  &  Alexandria,  the  (  nly 
connecting  roads,  for  more  than  twelve  mi  nths  without  a  contract..  Can 
you  allege  as  a  justification  of  .your  course  any  practical  evil  resulting 
therefrom?  I  aver  that  no  penalties  e-xpressed  in  a  contract,  however 
severe,  would  have  made  this  company  more  punctual  in  making  connec- 
tions, under  existing  diflicultics  attending  the  war,  than  they  were  without 
one.  Your  withholding  payment  therefore  for  actual  services  rendered,  is 
in  the  language.of  another  Piailroad  President,  "  arhiirary  an  iinrtasoiia- 
hle."  and  presents  a  case  of  abuse  of  power  which  should  be  resisted  in 
this  first  operation  of  our  government  an  account  of  its  bad  example,  as 
■well  as  for  the  individual  injustice  done  by  it.  I  have  always  been  willing 
to  sign  a  contract  which  did  not  invest  you  with  "arbitrary  and  unreason- 
able authority,"  and  which  gave  adequate  protectioii  to  the  interests  of  the 
Railroad  Company. 

I  said  I  regretted  to  observe  the  want  of  candor  and  foirness  exhibited  in 
your  letter.  On  page  20  you  say,  "  Tuu  (i)  demand  as  a  condition  abso- 
lute to  your  coniinuanceio  carry  the  mails,  that  the  Department  sdiall  allow 
you  to  determine  who  shall  ride  in  the  mail  cars,"  and  "say  you  u-dl  not 
continue  to  carry  the  mails  unless  the  Department  will ^nscnt  to  pay  youjor 
past  service  xvithout  a  contract."  Instead  of  making  Mis  threat,  I  said  the 
very  reverse,  and  it  was  before  you  when  you  wrote  the  letter,  and  is  ac- 
tually quoted  by  you  from  a  letter  of  the  General  Superintendent  of  2Sth 
ult.,  (which  you  acknowledge  to  be  written  under  my  instructions,)  in 
v/hich  alluding  to  his  contemplated  purpose  of  reducing  the  large  space' 
used  by  the  Department  wit;hout  compensation,  be  says,  "I  am  required  to 

*A  careful  reading  of  this  letter  now  in  the  course  of  publication,  suggests 
to  rne,  that  it  may  be  considered  harsh.  It  must  be  remembered  that  it  is  an 
answer  written  under  some  excitement,  to  correct  certain  statements,  and  op- 
pose imputations  I  thought  very  discourteous,  at. the  same  time  to  protect  the 
interests  of  the  company.  It  is  however  p'roper  I  should  say,  as  I  do  now 
without  any  solicitation,  that  my  strong  language  was  not  intended  to  be  of- 
fensive, but  merely  to  correct  errors. 


25 

adi">pt  some  plan  hy  which  the  company  will  get  remuneration  for  the 
lar^e  space  heretofore  occupied  by  your  departnient :  nt  the  same  time  the 
President  has  no  desire  to  punish  the  people  i)f  Virginia  and  the  soldiers  of 
our  army,  hy  rejectinfj;  the  mail,  even  though  you  persist  in  what  he  re- 
gardti  your  course  of  injustice."'  For  this  wrong  done  by  you,  altlioui2;h  [ 
might  have  been  justitied,  I  never  intenied  to  withliold  from  the  public, 
the  facilities  of  the  railroad  for  carryin;^  the  mails,  but  intended  to  object; 
to  signing  the  contract  unless  modified,  remembering  the  "  arbitrary  and 
unreasonable  "  course  you  pursued  when  1  was  in  your  power  under  a  sivai- 
lar  one,  and  the  annoying  and  vexatious  exactions  to  which  it  would  ex- 
pone  me. 

Under  the  contract  I  signed  for  the  first  term,  not  apprehendinp;  any 
abuse  of  power  which  might  be  claimo  1  under  it,  you  ordered  the  exclu- 
sion of  every  officer  of  the  company  from  the  large  apartment  in  which  the 
mails  were  carried,  but  subsequently  agreed  to  permit  the  President  and 
Superintendent  to  "  travel  ofl  the  mail  cars." 

In  allusion  to  this  ill  your  letter,  you  say,  "after  you  were  notifioi  of 
tKismodifi.-ation  of  tlie  rule  of  the  Department  admitting  Presidents  and 
Superintendents  of  llailroads  to  ride  in  the  inail  cars,  you  set  up  a  claim 
tliat  the  same  privilege  should  be  allowed  the  Directors,"  and  then  you  go 
on  to  make  extended  remarks  on  the  probability  of  my  increasing  my  de- 
mands as  you  make  concessions. 

This  charge,  like  the  first,  is  contradicted  by  the  record,  and  as  you  seem 
to  rely  much  on  it,  to  sustain  your  course.  T  will  state  tlie  facts  :  Having 
been  ordered  out  of  the  mail  cars  by  a  written  circular,  I  never  entered 
them  again  until  after  the  1st  of  July.  LSG;).  which  terminated  the  con- 
tract, although  by  reason  of  the  crowds  in  the  pacsenger  cars,  I  was  fre- 
quently compelled  to  sit  on  a  box  in  the  baggage  ci;r.  I  resolved  in  the 
Tioxt  contract  to  provide  against  notices  of  such  (:loul)tfHl  import,  and  to 
protect  the  Company  against  a  repetition  of  the  exercise  of  "arbitrary  and 
unreasonable  authority."  claimed  under  the  first  contract:  accurdinjily  on 
tiieod  of  .July,  18Go,  I  wrote  to  you,  that  continuing  to  carry  the  mail  was 
Eotto  be  'ntorpreted  as  acquiescence  in  what  had  transpired.  Among  other 
tbinsrs  objected  to  in  your  enforcement  of  the  expired  contract,  was  the  ox- 
olusi(m  oi'  the  Directors.  I  stated  expressly  that  the  "  chief  officers  "  of 
this  Company  ought  to  have  access  to  these  mail  apartments,  and  the 
reason  m-ged  was  to  see  that  there  were  no  uses  made  of  them  to  the  injury 
t.f  the  Company's  interest.  Subsequent  experience  has  abundantly  proven 
tliC  wisdom  of  this  precaution.  It  was  in  answer  to  this  letter  dated  od 
July,  1S03,  demanding  admission  of  the  Directors,  that  on  the  8th  of  the 
same  month  you  gave  me  the  first  notice  of  the  modification  mentioned, 
and  yet  you  construct  a  laboured  argument  on  the  statementj  that  I  did 
not  make  the  demand  untilnifter  the  notice.  All  your  argument  is  there- 
fore uiisound  because  based  on  data  unsustained  hy  the  fact. 

In  the  letter  to  me  of  the  8th  July  186^,  above  alluded  to,  you  concede 
that  some  officers  of  the  company  should  travel  in  the  mail  cars  ;  in  yOnr 
own  language,  "  to  prevent  anything  impioper  from  beinsr  carried  in 
them."  Why  should  you  assume  the  right  to  dictate  what  oflicers  of  the 
Company  shall  perform  this  duty,  which  you  admit  is  necessary.  The 
Directors  are  the  chosen  guardians  of  the  Company's  interests,  and  cannot 
be  excluded  without  the  imputation,  either  that  they  cannot  be  trusted 
where  the  mails  are  carried,  or  that  they  have  not  discretion  to  avoid  crowd- 
ing the  mail  .agent.  There  are  only  five  of  them,  and  they  very  rarely 
travel  more  than  one  at  a  time. 

I  do  not  propose  to  follow  your  letter  through  all  its  voluminous  errors 
in  statement  and  reasoning,  but  there  is  one  other  which  I  cannot  properly 
omit,  viz  :  What  you  say  as  to  the  course  of  yoCir  department  iu  reference 


26 

to  the  imposition  and  exaction  of  fines  as  compared  with  that  of  the  old 
Government.  You  say  on  page  5,  "  the  same  rules  of  construction  of  these 
contracts,  and  the  practice  under  them,  prevail  in  this  department  which 
prevailed  under  the  old  Government." 

This  statement  is  so  notoriously  unsustained  by  the  facts  of  the  ca^e, 
that  I  cannot  account  for  it  being  found  in  a  paper  signed  by  you,  except 
on  the  idea,  (which  may  also  account  for  other  errors,)  that  von  had  de- 
volved the  preparation  of  an  answer  to  my  letter  on  some  Bureau  nfficcv 
and  were  not  fully  apprised  of  its  contents — and  consequently  <ii 
the  inaccuracy  of  its  statements.  Let  that  be  however  as  it  mSy,  it 
is  the  fact  that  the '•practice  in  your  department"  under  a  contract  of 
the  same  provisions  is  so  different  from  that  of  the  old  government 
which  has  given  rise  to  one  of  the  most  serious  objections  to  signing  the 
contract.  ^  In  cases  under  the  old  U.  S.  government  where  postmasters  re- 
ported failures  to  arrive  in  contract  time,  or  any  other  case  subjecting  the 
contractor  to  a  fine,  it  was  the  practice  with  this  company  for  many  years, 
and  with  all  others,  I  understand  the  same  course  prevailed,  to  send  a  no- 
tice to  the  contractor  immediately  thereafter,  apprising  him  specifically  of 
the  charge,  and  enquiring  why  he  should  not  be  fined,  thus  giving  him  an 
opportunity  to  furnish  a  satisfactory  reason  if  he  could  do  so,  before  the 
fine  was  entered.  Now  I  know  from  experience,  and  it  also  appears  from 
one  of  your  regulations  now  before  me,  which  you  have  enacted,  that  you 
have  in  direct  terms  ordered  a  difl'erent  practice  from  that  of  the  old  gov- 
ernment, viz  :  "That  no  notice  be  given  to  contractors  of  failures  to  arrive 
at  any  postoflice  in  contract  time  as  reported  by  postmasters  to  the  depart- 
ment," and  you  do  impose  fines  without  notice.  To  justify  yourself  in  re- 
pealing and  changing  the  practice  of  the  old  government,  you  make  (as  ap- 
pears from  the  copy  of  the  same  regulation  above  alluded  to,)  a  most  un- 
reasonable assumption,  viz  :  that  "failures  to  arrive  at  the  end  of  routes  or 
other  points  cannot  but  be  known,  &c.  &c.,"  and  you  require  the  contrac- 
tor to  state  the  most  specific  reasons  for  each  failure  with  his  affidavit  in 
advance  without  knowing  whether  you  intend  to  line  or  not.  I  should 
have,  under  this  regulation,  to  find  out  daily  throughout  the  year  whether 
the  trains  arrive  in  contract  time  at  six  places.  The  details  of  your  re- 
quirements to  get  relief  from  one  of  these  fines,  imposed  without  notice, 
constitutes  another  most  material  change  from  the  "practice  of  the  old  go- 
vernment." The  affidavits  of  all  the  details  required,  and  the  diflBculty  of 
finding  out  whether  failures  occur,  would  be  so  harrassing  and  vexatious 
that  the  fines  would  in  ninety-nine  cases  out  of  hundred,  be  paid  rather 
than  incur  the  trouble  of  getting  clear  of  them- 

Your  regulations  sent  along  with  your  letter  present  a  new  and  serious 
objection  to  any  one  coming  under  your  authority  by  signing  a  contract. 
During  this  war,  knowing  the  endless  number  of  causes  of  failure,  1  might 
have  to  make  two  thousand  one  hundred  and  ninety  affidavits  to  ^'Ct  clear 
of  your  fines. 

When  enquiries  are  made  why  you  have  changed  the  practice  of  the  old 
government  on  this  subject  of  "  notice  "  before  fining — the  answer  which 
I  am  informed  you  give  is  extremely  offensive  :  that  if  the  delinquency  was 
specified  at  the  time,  and  before  fining,  parties  would  have  an  opportunity 
to  manufacture  a  false  excuse  to  fit  the  case.  Is  it  not  strange  that  a  Yan- 
kee Postmaster  General  who  never  required  any  of  these  things,  should  be 
more  appreciative  of  honorable  motives  than  one  of  our  Southern  gentle- 
men? 

Your  practice  under  the  contract  differs  in  another  most  material  partic- 
ular from  that  of  the  old  government:  with  them,  if  the  service  was  ren- 
dered, it  mattered  not  whether  it  was  done  voluntarily  or  by  requirement  of 
a  contract,  the  moral  obligation  to  pay  was  recognised,  and  it  would  seem 


27 

that  these  moral  obligations  ought  to  be  specially  observed  in  dealings  be- 
tween a  government  and  private  parties  where  there  is  no  power  of  coer- 
cion by  law. 

I  have  desired  to  compromise  the  diflSculty.  I  have  proposed  in  case  of 
a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  equity  of  your  decisions,  that  we  should 
appeal  to  the  Secretary  of  War,  but  you  are  inexorable  and  resolve  to  con- 
tinue in  the  unrestrained  exercise  of  your  individual  construction  and  en- 
forcement of  your  contracts. 

Officially  and  individually  I  have  made  and  expect  to  make  sacrifices 
when  necessary,  to  sustain  our  government  through  its  struggle  for  inde- 
pendence, and  on  that  principle,  this  company  like  most  others,  has  under-* 
taken  to  carry  the  mails  for  a  sum  infinitely  less  than  the  space  occupied 
by  them  would  yield  in  the  cheapest  freight  transportation,  and  therefore, 
for  the  public  accommodation,  we  shall  (as  you  have  been  before  fully 
advised,)  continue  to  carry  them,  even  if  you  continue  to  withhold  pay- 
ment for  service  actually  rendered  ;  but  though  willing  to  make  pecuniary 
sacrifices,  (whatever  others  may  do,)  with  my  experience  of  your  course. 
I  cannot,  by  signing  your  contract,  sanction  the  exercise  of  "  arbitrary  and 
unreasonable  authority,"  which  if  acquiesced  in,  will  soon  make  the  Poet- 
master  General  a  despot  in  his  sphere  of  operation. 

I  will  not  pursue  this  subject  farther,  but  supposing  that  for  the  present, 
ear  transportation  of  the  mail  is  to  be  done  without  any  pay  from  your  de- 
partment, we  must  try  and  make  something  out  of  the  surplus  room  in  the 
mail  car,  as  you  were  notified  by  ^Ir.  Whitcomb. 

Very  respectfully,  . 

E.  FOXTAIXE,  President. 


Virginia  Central  Railroad, 
General  Stipt^'s  Office,  Richmond,   Va.,  Avg  4,  1864. 
Sir, — I  respectfully  ask  the  return  of  the  original  letter  of  tlie  president, 
addressed  to  me,  relating  to  the  proposed  contract.     I  kept  no  copy.     I  will 
send  A  cofiy  to  you  if  desired,  or  you  can  take  one.  as  you  think  best. 

I  have  read  the  letter  of  the  postniaster  general  to  the   ])resident  of  this 
company,  and  observe,  with  extreme  surprise,  the  fillowing  passage: 
*     '•  Another  point  presented  in  the  notice  of  Superintendent  Whitcomb  i", 
that  unless  the  department  shall  pay  your  company   for  the  services  per- 
formed since  the  Ist  of  July,  1803,  it  will  refuse  to  carry  the  mails." 

I  have  carefully  read  over  my  "  notice"  to  the  postmaster  general,  and 
feel  compelled  to  say  that  no  such  threat  is  contained  in  that  document,  and 
no  language  is  used  which  would  warrant  such  a  construction  On  the 
contrary,  I  stated  that  "  the  president  has  no  desire  to  punish  the  people  of 
Virginia,  Ac,  by  rejecting  the  mail,  even  though  you  persist  in  what  he  re- 
gards your  course  of  injustice." 

Very  respectfully. 

Your  obedient  servant, 

H.  D.  WHITCOMB,   Gen.  Sup. 

H.  St.  Geo.  Offutt,  Esq.,  ChieJ  Contract  Bureau. 


PosTOFFiCE  Department, 

Eichmond,  Aiig.  4,  1864. 
Sir, — Mr.  Offutt,  the  chief  of  the  contract  bureau,  has  handed  me  your 
letter  of  this  date,  in  which  you  say : 

"  I  have  read  the  letter  of  the  postmaster  general  to  the  president  of  this 
company,  and  observe,  with  extreme  surprise,  the  following  passage: 


28 

•"  Another  point  presented  in  tlie  notice  of  Supei'mtonilent  \\'!src  nib 
is.  th^it  unless  the  ilepjirtment  shall  pay  your  company  for  tlmtser-.  i.-cV;  pnr- 
forniel  since  the  1st' of  July,  18(3o,  it  will  refuse  to  enrry  the  mails  ' 

'•  I  have  carefully  read  over  my  '  notice' to  tlie  postmaster  geiteral.  ■\'\(l 
ft>el  compelled  to  say  that  no  suoh  threat  is  coiituined  in  tlriu  (hn'uoi  nr, 
ssnrl  no  lanjruajre  is  use^  which   woiild   warrant  such  a  con---:  Oi\ 

the  contrary,  I  stated  the  president  has  no  de-ire  to  punish  of 

Virtrjnia.  &o.,  by  rejectino;  the  mail,  even  though  you  ]'(m--;-  h-^ 

regards  your  course  of  injustice." 

lo  votir  notice  above  referred  to,  you  say : 
'  "  I  am  instructed  by  the  president  of  tliis  company  to  sii\.  ity 

to  the  stnclclioldcrs  icill  not  allow  him  to  cnniimie  the  use  of  -   .  -'or 

ihc'm'Tils  ,vrl  yiiur  a(jcnts,xcithout  coinpcnsution-"  And  fn  Tl-piiin  \iai'»ay, 
"  If  the  Ci-i-ifing  difficulties  are  not  settled,  on  and  after  the  !>■/  '■/'  Ain/n.^fi 
ahull  (Icviand  nf  all  your  agents  the  pnyment  of  the  usual  nre  aj  fry-  r'liss 
pai<S'-iiners.  lohen  they  travel  toith  the  mail,  and  shall  also  limit  f.l''  ■;  ■■■  ■■  to 
be  vcviipicil  liy  the  mails." 

I  (pjMted  the  M'hole  of  your  notice,  including  the  above -pit-  ny 

letter  to  the  president  of  the  company^  which  you  say  you  lia\e  hmu  I 
now  itali'-ise  these  passages,  to  call  your  .attention  specially  to  them.  It 
is  my  duty  to  say  that  your  notice  would  convey  to  any  stranger  to  this 
discussion  the  impression  that  this  deparhnent  had  refused,  and  was-  re- 
fusing!; to  pay  the  company  for  the  service  it  had  perfornu'd  and  was  per- 
{orm'wf:,,  and  thAt  in  consequence  of  thts,  you  proposed  to.rt^fuse  to Onry 
the  mails,  unless  payment  was  made.  Now,  the  truth  is — and  -I  suppose 
Tou  have  all  the'tirae  been. fully  aware  of  it^that  this  department  is  now, 
and  has  all  the  time  been  willing  and  anxious  to  pay  your  c  loipafiy  for  all 
the  service  it  has  performed  or  may  perform,  if  it  would  enter  into  the 
usual  contract.  And  a  further  truth  is,  that  you  proposed  by  your  notice 
to  coniftcl  the  department  to  pay  your  company  witbotit  its  having  eriteied 
into  contract.  ■  ' 

The  terms  of  contract  between  the  department  and  railrmd  compisnies 
require,  "  that  the  mails  shall  be  conveyed  in  a  secure  and  safe  manner, 
free  from  wet  or  other  injurj',  in  a  separate  and  convenient  car,  or, apart- 
ment of  a  car,  suitably  fitted  up.  furnished,  warmed  and  liglited,  under 
direction  of  the  postoffice  department,  and  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  post-, 
master  general,  or  of  his  authorized  special  >agent,  at  the  expense  <.r  the 
contractor,  for  the  assorting  and  safekeeping  of  the  mail,  and  for  the  ex- 
clusive use  of  the  department  aud  its  mail  figent';  and  such  agenUshall  bo 
conveyed  free  of  charge."  - 

And  "  that  the  company  shall  convey,  free  of  charge,      *         *         * 
all  aoci'edited  special  agents  of  the  department,  on  the  exhibition  of  their  . 
credentials." 

I  did  not  profess  to  give  your  language  when  I  said  your  notice  was  a  re- 
fusal to  continue  to  carry  the  mails,  unless  the  department  would  pay  the 
company  for  past  services,  rendered  without  a  contract,  and  with  notice 
that  it  would  not  pay  for  service'without  a  contract. 

You  say  such  was  not  the  language  or  meaning  of  your  notice.  But  you 
cannot  be  ignorant  of,  the  fact  that  this  department  could  not  send  its  mail."? 
along  your  road  by  a  "  passenger,"  wliieh  you  proposed  to  consider  its 
agent,  or  without  the  room  and  facilities  required  for  the  security  and  dis- 
tribution of  the  mails,  and  under  circumstances  which  would  exclude  the 
department  from  the  exclusive  control  of  tiio  necessary  rocim  and  fat^ilities 
•to  enable  it  to  have  the  service  performed.  When  you  refuse  to  allow  the 
department  the  means  and  facilities  for  carrying  the  mails,  and  refuse  to 
enter  into  tho  usual  and  necessary  contract  to  enaljle  it  to  carry  them  on 
your  road,  whatevsr  ingenuity  of  language-you  employ  to  avoid  the  resjion- 


29 

sibili*y  of  a  refusal  to  carry  tlie  mails,  I  am  authorized  an;l  boui.d  to  re- 
gard such  aftiun  as  a  refusal  to  carry  the  mails.  If  we  CiiiiiKit  a'Tfec  ai?  to 
the  effect  of  your  notice,  the  public  muvt,  in  case  of  necessity,  juda,e  be- 
tween U3.  I  chose  to  consider  and  act  on  the  meaning  and  etfect  of  your 
notice,  in  view  of  the  precedent  facts  and  necessary  consequence;?  which 
must  flow  fmm  it,  and  not  to  spend  time  in  discussinjx  the  questiisn  ns  to 
whether  deprivine;  the  department  of  the  means  to  carry  the  mailsonyour 
road,  and  refusing  to  carry  them  under  a  contract  which  would  suliject  the 
cunipanv  to  the  laws  and  regulations  which  provide  for  the  security  of  the 
mails  aiid  the  regularity  of  the  service,  was  or  was  not  a  refusal  to  carry 
the  mails. 

Very  respectful  I  v, 

JOiiN  il.  REAGAN,  P.  M.  General. 
JI.  D.  Whitcomb,  Esq.,  Gen.  Supt.  Va.  Central  /?.  R. 

RicnjioND,  Va.,  August  0,  1804.    . 

Sir, — Below  I  send  you  a  copy  of  an  order  from  Mr.  "Whitconib,  gpiieral 
superintendent  of  the  Virginia  Central  railroad,  to  the  conductors  of  8p,i(i 
road :  ,       , 

"  August  5,  1864. — On  and  after  Tucday  next,  you  will  demand  from 
the  agents  of  the  postoffice  department  traveling  on  the  cars,  the  regular 
fare  for  first  class  passengers.  In  executing  this  order  for  the  present,  how- 
ever,'nothing  is  to  l)e  done  to  the  ro}ite  ayent  in  cht.ir(;c  oj  the  mail,  wlilcb 
will  prevent  its  being  distributed  as  u,>^ual.  Should  he  refuse  payment, 
your  remedy  will  be  to  report  the  fact  to  me  for  further  action. 

II.  D.  WUITCOMB,  GcH.  Sup." 

Today  the  order  was  made,  and  we  positively  refused  to  pay  the  fare. 

They  have  taken  our  water  cooler  and  sto\e  out,  and  wo  now  have  none 
of  the  comforts  heretofore  enjoyed  in  the  car. 

Please  instruct  us  what  to  do. 

Very  respectfully. 


Hull.  J.  n.  Reagan,  P.  AT.  General. 


^\M.  II.  HAAS, 
U.  G.  UOOCil. 
Route  Agents  Ventral  R.  R, 


PoSTOFFiri:    TlKrARTJIEN'T, 

Richmnnd,  Augir.'it  10,  1801. 
Gen'tlemev: 

Y.iur  letter  of  yesterday,  furnishing  me  with  a  copy  of  the  order  of  II. 
D.  Wliitcomb,  Esq.,  geuerfil  superintendent  of  the  Vuginia  Cfentral  Rail- 
road, dated  the  5th  instant,  to  the  conductors  of  said  railr  ad,  directing 
thera  to  demand  from  the  agents  of  the  postoflico  department  the  regular 
i'are  for  first  class  passengers,  and  advising  me  of  your  refusal  to  pay  the 
fare,  is  received.  You  also  say,  "they  |the  railroad  company)  have  taken 
our  water  cooler  and  stove  out,  and  we  now  have  none  of  the  comforts 
heretofore  enjoyed  in  the  car." 

You  did  right  in  refu.siug  to  pay  the  fare  demanded  under  this  order, 
and  you  are  directed  not  to  go  upon  the  cars  of  this  company  as  the  agents 
of  this  department,  nor  to  attempt  to  carry  the  mails  on  them  hereaftef, 
unless  by  its  directions,  hereafter  to  be  given. 

You  will  please  notify  Mr.  E.  J.  Swift,  your  associate  route  agent,  that 
this  order  applies  to  him  as  well  as  to  yourselves. 
Very  respectfully. 

.JUlIN-  II.  RE  AG  AX,  P.  M.  General, 

Win  U.  Uxas  and  G.   G.   GoocJi,  Rnitc  Jgcnt-f,   Va.  Cent.  R.  Jt. 


30 

The  following  letter  was  delivered  possibly  after  the  others  were  in  type, 
but  several  days  before  the  pamphlet  appeared: 

Virginia  Central  Railroad, 
Presidenfs  Office,  Richmond,  Va.,  August  31,  1864. 
JIo7i.  J.  H  Eeagan,  P.  M.  General. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  reason  to  suppose  that  you  misunderstood  what  I 
have  done  and  proposed  to  do  on  the  subject  of  the  demand  of  the  pay- 
ment of  fare  from  the  Route  Agents  of  the  Postoffice  Department  on  this 
road  about  the  time  of  the  withdrawal  of  the  mails,  and  deem  it  proper 
that  you  should  be  correctly  informed-^the  statement  of  facts  is  as 
follows : 

You  had  considered  it  your  duty  to  withhold  payment  for  the  service  of 
1SG3-4  in  consideration  of  the  contract  not  being  signed,  for  reasons  it  is 
not  now  necessary  to  mention.  The  Board  of  Directors  being  very  unwill- 
ing to  have  a  rupture  with  the  Department  on  this  subject,  bad  more  than 
once  considered  _  how  the  space  appropriated  to  the  mails  could  be  made 
productive  in  this  state  of  things.  The  mail  apartment  was  unnecessarily 
large,  having  been  constructed  to  suit  the  U.  S.  mail,  which  by  reation  of 
the  franking  privilege  was  on  an  average  at  least  twice  as  large  as  that  of 
the  Confederate  mail ;  I  called  the  attention  of  the  Superintendent  to  the 
views  of  the  Board  about  the  last  of  July.  It  was  found  that  the  mail 
apartment  was  22  feet  in  length  ;  it  was  curtailed  to  13^  feet  in  length, 
being  in  the  opinion  of  the  superintendent  and  other  officers  familiar  with 
the  size  of  the  mails,  larger  than  was  necessary. 

In  addition  to  this,  the  general  Superintendent  suggested  that  the  route 
agent  ought  to  pay  his  fare  as  he  had  no  free  privilege  by  contract;  to 
this  I  objected,  as  it  might  bring  on  the  very  difficulty  with  your  depart- 
ment which  I  wished  to  avoid  ;  but  on  the  renewal  of  the  suggestion  from 
him,  I  consented  that  he  might  make  the  experiment,  but  with  the  dis- 
tinct instruction,  that  if  payment  was  declined,  nothing  should  be  done 
which  could  at  all  interfere  with  the  continued  execution  of  the  agents 
duty,  in  attending  to  the  mails. 

I  herewith  enclose  to  you  copies  of  the  Superintendent's  instructions,  on 
the  subject,  to  the  conductors,  from  which  you  will  see,  that  it  never  was 
his  intention,  much  less  my  own,  to  insist  on  the  collection  of  fare  from 
the  route  agent  if  objected  to.  When  the  Superintendent  received  an  an- 
swer from  the  department,  showing  their  construction  of  his  notice,  per- 
haps if  he_  had  then  explained  our  intentions,  on  the  subject  of  asking 
fare,  it  might  have  been  better,  but  the  copies  of  instructions,  and  this 
explanation  will  prove  that  we  never  contemplated  the  slightest  possible 
interference  with  the  accommodation,  regular  transmission,  or  distribution 
of  the  mails. 

Very  respectfully, 

E.  FONTAINE,  President. 

August  10,  1864. 
Conductor : 

The  postmaster  general  has  chosen  to  construe  my  notice  that  I  would 
expect  passengers  fare  from  the  route  agents  in  charge  of  the  mails  while 
we  were  carrying  it  without  contract,  and  without  pay,  into  a  threat  on 
my  part  that  we  would  not  carry  it  at  all ;  my  order  was  explicit,  that  noth- 
ing way  to  be  done  which  would  prevent  the  regular  distribution  of  the 
mail.  But  in  crier  to  put  this  matter  entirely  at  rest,  you  will  discon- 
t.m>e  the  demand  from  the  route  agents,  although  so  long  as  there  is 
nothing  paid  by  the  postoffice  department,  such  fare  is  undoubtedly  duo 
to  the  company; 

II.  D.  WIIITCOMB,  Gen.  Supt. 


